31“ > _ !!

 

 

l

 

 

 

masts

----- m 3" v
fi. '3 t .1." V191;-
5331 v $5
a
0‘ ... 7" '3;"'/.‘,=73
Mflfirfi n ~ ~w
(I. '
«SEW—’7?" ’10 I. I}? ‘ i
i was egg, who i
I
i J
'1 ____________.--fl‘

 

This is to certify that the

dissertation entitled

An Economic Analysis of Rice Production
Systems and Production Organization of Rice Farmers
in The Gambia

presented by

A1 imami M . Kargbo

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

Ph.D. degreein Ag. Econ.

 

 

.{Z [t’bé'fi'k/ fl (IL/L L c <7.sz

Major professor

Date November 10, 1983

 

MSU is (m Afl'irntatiw' Action/Equal Opportunity Institution 0 - 12771

 

 

 

RETURNING MATERIALS:
PViESI_i Piace in book drop to
LIBRARJES remove this checkout from
w your record. FINES wiH

 

 

 

be charged if book is
returned after the date
stamped below.

 

D NOT CIR LATE

‘USEO [Y

 

[TE 37‘. ,w,;:.tg- .-|1 spurt”. 1
~. I (“3 t. , 1.x in.
» b We” ,g, fig: {5 u _ :_

 

 

 

 

 

AN ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF RICE PRODUCTION SYSTEMS
AND PRODUCTION ORGANIZATION OF RICE FARMERS IN
THE GAMBIA

By

ATimami M. Kargbo

A DISSERTATION

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partiaT fuifiiiment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of Agricuiturai Economics

1983

 

 

/ /: filflif

ABSTRACT
AN ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF RICE PRODUCTION SYSTEMS

AND PRODUCTION ORGANIZATION OF RICE FARMERS IN
THE GAMBIA

By

ATimami M. Kargbo

The main objectives of this study were to identify and describe
the different rice production systems, determine and compare the
financiaT and economic costs and returns of the different rice
production systems, and to estimate the totaT amount of resources used
in rice farming and the rice incomes of rice farmers. Four different

types of rice production systems were identified--upTand rice,

bafaro, mangrove, and irrigated rice. The observed yiers were about

1.3, 1.8, 1.9, 2.7, and 2.4 tons of paddy with Tabor inputs of about
254, 361, 326, 331, and 324 workdays per hectare of upTand rice,

bafaro rice, mangrove rice, dry and wet season irrigated rice,

respectively. FamiTy Tabor contributed more than 90% of the Tabor
inputs. Women accounted for more than 87% of the totaT Tabor input
in the upTand, pajarg, and mangrove rice systems and more than 50%
in the irrigated rice systems. Men contributed more than 90% of
the totaT Tabor input in aTT upTand crops.

In the financiaT anaTysis, aTT rice systems had positive

net enterprise incomes, but onTy upTand rice and mangrove rice had

 

 

ATimami M. Kargbo

returns per workday to famiTy Tabor and management that were higher
than the enterprise wage rate. The economic anaTysis showed negative
net economic returns for aTT the rice enterprises. A sensitivity
anaTysis reveaTed that onTy upTand rice and mangrove rice, and to a
Timited extent, bafarg rice offered any hope for optimism regarding
the nationaT goaT of achieving seTf—sufficiency in rice production.

The financiaT and economic anaTysis of aTT the upTand crops
showed positive net enterprise incomes and net economic returns.
Adopting a poTicy of rice seTf—sufficiency through an expansion of
irrigated rice cuTtivation may Tead to substantiaT reductions in
the gross domestic product of the country.

Groundnut is by far the most important source of income
utiTizing about 39% of the Tand cuTtivated and 26% of the totaT crop
Tabor input per househon. UpTand cereaTs and rice each accounted
for 39% of the Tand area cuTtivated. They used about 18% and 55%
of the crop Tabor input, respectiveTy.

This study recommends that in the Tong run prices received by
farmers be increased for aTT food grains; that women's cooperatives
be estabTished for rice marketing; that UpTand rice, mangrove rice,
and bafarg rice be given equaT attention as that accorded to irrigated
rice; that an efficient input deTivery system be estabTished; and
that women become an integraT part of the pTanning and impTementation

process of aTT rice deveTopment programs in The Gambia.

 

DEDICATED

To
My parents, Sama Kargbo and KoToneh Sisay,

without whom nothing woqu have been possibTe
and To

Dr. Dunstan S.(Z.Spencer, with gratitude and
appreciation for his support, encouragement,

and confidence in me throughout my graduate studies

ii

 

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

It is impossibTe to acknowTedge the assistance of aTT those
peopTe and institutions that contributed to the cTimax of this work,
but speciaT appreciation is due to some of them. Among these Dr. CarT
K. Eicher deserves my profound gratitude and appreciation. He served
as my major professor from the time I entered Michigan State University
untiT his departure for Zimbabwe in January 1983. His directions,
encouragement, and interest in a student's weTfare are exempTary.

A speciaT thanks is due to Dr. Warren Vincent, in his current
capacity as my major professor and thesis supervisor. His Tong
research experience and cordiaT reTationship with students created a
comfortabTe environment in the writing of this thesis. I appreciate
the constructive and usefuT comments of other members of my guidance
committee incTuding Dr. Eric Crawford, Dr. Victor E. Smith, and Dr.
Lindon Robison. They were especiaTTy heTpfuT in the finaT phase of

the thesis write up.

Fier work in The Gambia woqu never have been possibTe with-
out my association and generous financiaT support of the West Africa
Rice DeveTopment Association (WARDA). Deserving my deepest gratitude
are Dr. D. S. C. Spencer, who supervised the fier work, Dr. R. Kagbo
and the entire WARDA staff in The Gambia for providing TogisticaT

support.

 

 

I am aTso gratefuT to Mr. Reuben A. Thomas, Director of the
AgricuTture Department of The Gambia and to Mr. Tamsir Jagne, Agri-
cuTturaT Officer, Jenoi, for their support, understanding and inter-
est in my fier work. I wiTT not forget the services of my enumerators
—-Musa Sisay, Lamin Kamara, Musa Gaye, Amat Kujabi, ETizabeth Ninson,
Saihu Marenah, Foday Touray, Buba Ceesay, Mamadi Njie, SaTifu Sambou,
Chuku Sonko, Lang Darboe, Mariama Sangnia, Kabba Jobateh, and Yankuba
Marenah for their patience and endurance during the time the data were
being coTTected. I am aTso thankfuT to IsmaiT Dibba, whose knowTedge
of The Gambia made traveTTing comfortabTe for me.

My appreciation goes to SheryT Rich and Cindy SpiegeT who
despite their crowded hours found time to type part of the first draft
of this thesis. PauT Winder provided vaTuabTe assistance in the com-
puter anaTysis. I woqu Tike to thankijmaAfrican-American Institute
for its vaTuabTe financiaT support throughout my graduate studies.

To aTT facuTty and feTTow graduate students of the department, I
extend my sincere appreciation for their individuaT moraT and academic
support during the period of my graduate program. LastTy, but my

no means the Teast, I wish to thank aTT members of my immediate

famiTy for their understanding of the negTect showed upon them and

the painfuT separation they had to endure throughout my studies at

Michigan State University.

iv

 

 

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES .

LIST OF FIGURES

Chapter
I.

II.

INTRODUCTION

Background .
The Gambian Economy .
AgricuTture in The Gambia
ProbTem Setting .
Need for the Study . .
Objectives of the Study
Research Method .
SampTing Procedure
Conduct of Survey .
Data Preparation .
The AnaTytic Approach .
PTan of the Remaining Chapters

A DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA .

Introduction
Location
PhysicaT Characteristics
CTimate . .
$0115 and Vegetation .
SociaT Structure . .
Age Grades (kafos)
Demography .
The RoTe of Women
Land Tenure -
Land ATTocation . .
ATTocation of Land Used by Women .
ATTocation of Land to Strange Farmers
Land Use and Land Use Pattern
Summary . . . . .

 

Page

ix

xiv

 

Chapter

III.

IV.

A DESCRITPION OF THE RICE PRODUCTION SYSTEMS AND THE
SEXUAL DIVISION OF LABOR . .

Introduction

Labor Measurement . .

Input and Output Aggregation .

The Rice Production Systems
UpTand Rice .
Bafaro
Mangrove Rice
Irrigated Rice .

Post—Harvest Activities
Threshing
Winnowing
Drying
MiTTing

Rice Irrigation Projects in The Gambia
The JakhaTTy and Patcharr Swamps
The Taiwan Mission Project . .
AgricuTturaT Rice DeveTopment Project
The Agro- Chinese Project
Future PTans for Irrigated Rice

Rice Marketing and Pricing PoTicy
Marketing . . . .
Pricing PoTicy

Production Practices on .UpTand Crops
Groundnuts . . . . .
Maize .
Sorghum . . . . .

EarTy (suno) and Late (Sanyo o) MiTTet
Marketing and Pricing PoTicy for Groundnut
Marketing . . . . . .

Pricing PoTicy -
Gender Division of Labor in .Crop Production .
Summary. . - - .

 

A FINANCIAL AND ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF THE RICE PRODUC—

TION SYSTEMS AND OTHER CROPS .

Introduction . . .
Input VaTuation for the. Rice Enterprises .
Land . . . .

Labor

Seed

FertiTizer .

Irrigation and PTowing Charges

Overhead Costs .

vi

Page

51

51
52
55
55
55
6O
64
67
75
75
75
76
76
76
77
78
78
79
79
82
82
84
85
86
90
91
95
97
97
100
104
118

120

120
121
121
123
127
127
128
130

 

Chapter Page

Output VaTuation . . . . 130
FinanciaT AnaTysis of the Rice Production Systems . . 133
Comparison of FinanciaT Costs and Benefits . . . 133
Economic AnaTysis of the Rice Production Systems . . 144
A Comparison of the Economic Costs and Benefits
in Rice Production . . . . . 144
FinanciaT and Economic AnaTysis of Groundnut and
UpTand CereaTs . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
Input VaTuation . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
Output VaTuation . . . . . 153
Comparison of FinanciaT Costs and Benefits . . . 153
Economic AnaTysis . . . . 162
Comparison of the FinanciaT and Economic Costs and
Returns of ATT the Crop Enterprises . . . . . . 165
Costs and Benefits of Rice SeTf— -Sufficiency . . . . 170
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . 176
V. FARM INCOME ANALYSIS AND RESOURCE USE AMONG GAMBIAN
RICE FARMERS . . . . 179
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179
Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 180
Defining the Farm . . . . . . . . 181
Resource Use by the SampTe. PopuTation . . . . . . 182
Land . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182
Labor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184
Farm Equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . 197
Farm Income AnaTysis . . . . . . . . . . . 198
VaTue of Output . . . . . . . . 198
Operating Expenses and Gross Margin . . . . . . 203
Fixed Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 204
TotaT Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205
Net Farm Income . . . . . . . 205
Return to FamiTy Labor and Management . . . . . 205
Net FarmiTy Earnings . . . - 206
RegionaT InfTuence on Farm Organization and Farm
Income . . . . . 207
Resource Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208
Land . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208
Labor . . . . . . . . . . . . 210
Farm Equipment 225
Farm Income AnaTysis . 227
VaTue of Output . . 227
Operating Costs and Gross Margin 230
Fixed Costs - ~ 33%
TotaT Costs 232
Net Farm Income .
Return to FamiTy Labor and Management Egg

Net FamiTy Earnings

vii

v‘r:'7:r

y 1...-«

Apibv .-
1»\ ICES

 

Chapter page

The InfTuence of Size of Land Honing on Farm

Organization and Farm Income . . . . . . . . 235
Resource Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . 236
Land . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 236
Labor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 238
Farm Equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . 252
Farm Income AnaTysis . . . . . . . . . . . 254
VaTue of Output . . . . . . . . . 254
Operating Costs and Gross Marin . . . . . . 257
Fixed Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . 258
TotaT Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . 258
Net Farm Income . . . . . . 258
Return to FamiTy Labor and Management . . . . 259
Net FamiTy Earnings . . . . . . . . . . 259
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 261

VI. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, POLICY IMPLICATIONS AND
DIRECTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH' . . . . . . . . 264
Summary and ConcTusions . . . . . . . 264
PoTicy ImpTications and Recommendations . . . . . 279
Prices and Pricing PoTicy . . . . . . . . . 279
Output DisposaT . . . . . . . . . 280
Women' s RoTe in Rice Production . . . . . . . 281
IndividuaT Rice Enterprises . . . . . . . . 281
Input DeTivery . . . . . . . . . . . . . 284
AgricuTturaT Credit . . . . . . . . . . . 284
UpTand CereaTs Improvements . . . . . . . . 285
Areas for Further Research . . . . . . . . . 285
\PPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 288
A. INPUT/OUTPUT DATA ON COTTON . . . . . . . . . 289
B. MONTHLY LABOR INPUTS BY TYPE OF FARMING SYSTEM . . . 293

{EFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297

viii

 

Tater

TabTe
1.

1

(IT

 

LSIT OF TABLES

Gross Domestic Product at Producers VaTue by Broad
IndustriaT Origin in Constant 1976/77 Prices,
1974/75 to 1980/81 (miTTion daTasis) . .

Exports of PrincipaT Commodities (miTTion daTasis) .
Mean AnnuaT RainfaTT and August Means

SoiTs SuitabiTity Groups

Changes in Vegetation Cover

Structure of the SampTe PopuTation

Average Area of Crops CuTtivated by ViTTage and Region
per househon .

Summary of Input/Output Data on the Different Types of
Rice Production Systems . . . . . .

Summary of MonthTy and Activity Labor ProfiTes in Rice
CuTtivation . . . . . . . . . .

Summary of Input/Output Data on UpTand Crops .

Summary of MonthTy and Activity Labor ProfiTes in
UpTand Crops . . . .

Distribution of Labor per Hectare in UpTand Rice CuTti-
vation by Type of Labor and Activity .

Distribution of Labor per Hectare in Bafaro Rice CuTti-
vation by Type of Labor and Activity .

Distribution of Labor per Hectare in Mangrove Rice
CuTtivation by Type of Labor and Activity .

Distribution of Labor per Hectare in Dry Season Irri-
gated Rice CuTtivation by Type of Labor and Activity

Distribution of Labor per Hectare in Wet Season Irri~
gated Rice CuTtivation by Type of Labor and Activity

ix

 

Page

26
29
30
37

48

57

74
87

99

106

107

108

109

110

 

TahTe

I D t, I
I .. -4.
o

TabTe

3.

3.

r: 4: 4> 4:

10

11

.12

.13

.14

.10

.11
.12
.13
.14

 

Distribution of Labor per Hectare in Groundnut CuTti-
vation by Type of Labor and Activity . . .

Distribution of Labor per Hectare in Maize CuTtivation
by Type of Labor and Activity . . . . .

Distribution of Labor per Hectare in Sorghum CuTtiva-
tion by Type of Labor and Activity . . .

Distribution of Labor per Hectare in EarTy MiTTet
(Suno) CuTtivation by Type of Labor and Activity

Distribution of Labor per Hectare in Late MiTTet
(Sanyo) CuTtivation by Type of Labor and ACtivity .

Import Parity Price of Paddy .

UpTand Rice Enterprise Budget per Hectare

Bafaro Rice Enterprise Budget per Hectare

Mangrove Rice Enterprise Budget per Hectare .

Dry Season Irrigated Rice Enterprise Budget per
Hectare . . . . . . . . . .

Wet Season Irrigated Rice Enterprise Budget per
Hectare . . . . . . . . . .

Economic Costs and Benefits of Rice Production in
The Gambia per Hectare .

Economic Costs and Benefits of Producing One Ton of
Paddy in The Gambia . .

Comparison of Output Required to Make Net Economic
Returns per Ton EquaT to Zero . . . .

Economic Costs and Benefits per Ton of Paddy with
FamiTy Labor VaTued at Different Rates .

Export Parity Price for Groundnut
Groundnut Enterprise Budget per Hectare
Maize Enterprise Budget per Hectare

Sorghum Enterprise Budget per Hectare .

 

Page

111

112

113

114

115
132
134
135
136

137

138

145

146

149

152
154
156
157
158

 

bTe
.14
.15
.16
.17

.18

.19

.20

 

Sorghum Enterprise Budget per Hectare .
EarTy MiTTet (Suno) Enterprise Budget per Hectare .

Late MiTTet (Sanyo) Enterprise Budget per Hectare .

Economic Costs and Benefits of Groundnuts and UpTand
CereaTs per Hectare . . . . . .

Economic Costs and Benefits of Groundnut and UpTand
CereaTs per Ton . . . . . .

Comparison of the FinanciaT and Economic Costs and
Returns per Ton of CrOp

Net Economic Returns per Ton of Paddy in ReTation to
Woer Price of Rice . . . . . . . . .

Effect of Rice SeTf—Sufficiency on Gross NationaT
Product Given Different Woer Prices (in thousand

DaTasis)

Average Area per Househon (Dabada) Devoted to Each
Crop for the SampTe PopuTation . . . .

Average Number of Persons per Househon (Dabada) by
Type of Labor for the SampTe PopuTation

 

Average Distribution of Labor Input per Househon
(Dabada) by Type of Labor and Crop Enterprise (in
Workdays) for the SampTe PopuTation)

Distribution of Labor Input per Househon (Dabada) by
Type of Labor and Major Activity.( in Workday s} for the

SampTe PopuTation

MonthTy Distribution of Labor Input by Activity for
the SampTe PopuTation (In Workdays) .

Average Number of Ox-Drawn Equipment/AnimaTs Owned
per Househon (Dabada) for the SampTe PopuTation

Average Househon (Dabada) Farm Budget for the SampTe
PopuTation . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Sources of Farm Income and Percentage Land and Labor
Used for Each Crop for the SampTe PopuTation [per
Househon (Dabada)] . . . . .

xi

 

Page
158
159
160

163

164

166

171

175

183

185

186

188

194

199

200

201

 

TabTe

5.

U1

9

.10

.11

.12

.13

.14

.15

.16
.17

.18

.19

.20

.21

 

Page

Average Area per Househon (DaLada) Devoted to Each
Crop by Major Type of Rice CuTtivation Region . . . 209

Average Number of Persons per Househon (Dabada) by
Type of Labor and by Type of Major Rice CuTtivation

Region 211

Average Distribution of Labor Input per Househon
(Dabada) by Type of Labor and Crop Enterprise in the
Mangrove Rice Growing Region (in Workdays) . . . . 213

Average Distribution of Labor Input per Househon
(Dabada) by Type of Labor and Crop Enterprise in the

Bafaro Rice Growing Region (in Workdays) . . . . . 214

Average Distribution of Labor Input per Househon
(Dabada) by Type of Labor and Crop Enterprise in the
Irrigated Rice Growing Region (in Workdays) . . . . 215

Distribution of Labor Input per Househon (DaLada) by
Type of Labor, Major Activity, and Major Type of Rice

CuTtivation 218

Average Number of Ox-drawn Equipment/AnimaTs Owned per
Househon (Dabada) by Major Type of Rice CuTtivation

Region 216

Average Househon (Dabada) Farm Budget By Region . . 228

Sources of Farm Income and Percentage Land and Labor
Used for Each Crop by Major Type of Rice CuTtivation
[per Househon (DaLada)] . . . . 229

Average Area per Househon (Dabada) Devoted to Each
Crop by Size of Land Honing . . . . . . . . . 237

Average Number of Persons per Househon (Dabada) by
Type of Labor and Land Size Honing . . . . . . 239

Average Distribution of Labor Input per Househon
(Dabada) by Type of Labor and Crop Enterprise-~SmaTT

Farmers (in Workdays) . . . . 240

Average Distribution of Labor Input per Househon
(Dabada) by Type of Labor and Crop Enterprise—-Medium
Farmers (in Workdays) . . . . 241

xii

 

 

 

 

Average Distribution of Labor Input per Househon
(DaLada) by Type of Labor and Crop Enterprise--

Large Farmers (in Workdays)

Distribution of Labor Input per Househon (Dabada)
by Type of Labor, Major Activity, and Size of Land

Honing (in Workdays)

Average Number of Ox—drawn Equipment/AnimaTs Owned
per Househon (Dabada) by Size of Land Honing .

Average Househon (Dabada) Budget by Size of Land
Honing . . . . . . . . . . .

Sources of Farm Income and Percentage Land and Labor
Used for Each Crop by Size of Land Honing [pero
Househon (per DaLada)] .

Cotton Enterprise Budget per Hectare

Labor Distribution in Cotton CuTtivated by Type of
Labor and Activity . . . .

MonthTy Labor Input by Region and Activity (in Work-
days) per DaLada . . . .

MonthTy Labor Input by Size of Land Honing and
Activity (in Workdays) per Dabada . .

xiii

 

Page

242

246

253

255

256

290

291

294

295

Figure

1.

1

.10

LIST OF FIGURES

Location of The Gambia .

TotaT Consumption and Domestic Production of Rice

in The Gambia .

Area Covered in the Survey

Average AnnuaT RainfaTT,

1981

Nasso Kunda, Bureng: Kinship

Nasso Kunda, Bureng: Diagram

MonthTy Distribution of
Rice CuTtivation .

MonthTy Distribution of
Rice CuTtivation .

Monthly Distribution of
Rice CuTtivation .

MonthTy Distribution of
Season Rice CuTtivation

MonthTy Distribution of
Season Rice Cuitivation

Rice Marketing ChanneTs

MonthTy Distribution of

nut CuItivation

MonthTy Distribution of

CuTtivation

MonthTy Distribution of

CuTtivation

MonthTy Distribution of

Labor

Labor

Labor

Labor

Labor

Labor

Labor

Labor

Labor

(suno) MiTTet CuTtivation .

xiv

Diagram

of the Compound

per Hectare in UpTand

per
per
per

per

Per

per

Hectare

Hectare

Hectare

Hectare

Hectare

Hectare

in Bafaro
in Mangrove
in Dry

in Met

in Ground-

in Maize

per Hectare in Sorghum

per

Hectare

in Ear1y

Page

11
24
27
34
35

59

62

66

69

7O
83

89

92

94

96

 

Page

Montth Distribution of Labor per Hectare in Late

 

(sanyo) MiTTet Cuitivation . . . . . . . . . 98
Groundnut Marketing ChanneTs . . . . . . . . . 101
Labor ProfiTe per Hectare of Mangrove Rice, Late

MiTTet and Groundnut . . . . . . . . . . . 169
MonthTy Labor ProfiTe per HousehoId (Dabada) of the

Whole SampTe . . . . . . . . . . . . 195
MonthTy Labor ProfiTe per Househon (Dabada) in the

Mangrove Rice Region . . . . . . . . . . . 221
MonthTy Labor ProfiIe per Househon (Dabada) in the

Bafaro Rice Region . .- . . . . . . . . . . 222
MonthTy Labor ProfiTe per Househon (Dabada) in the

Irrigated Rice Region . . . . . . . . . . . 223
MonthTy Labor ProfiTe per Household (Dabada) of

SmaTI Farmers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248
MonthTy Labor ProfiTe per Household (Dabada) of

Medium Farmers . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249
MonthTy Labor ProfiIe per Househon (Dabada) of

Large Farmers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 250
Montth Labor Distribution'H1Cotton CuTtivation . . 292

XV

 

 

 

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

The Republic of The Gambia forms a narrow band on either side

 

of the River Gambia and has a surface area of about 11,295 square
kilometers (kms). The country, which is between latitudes 13.30°
and 13.50° Nest, penetrates over 300 kms into Senegalese territory.
It forms a narrow band along the river that varies in width from 28

kms upstream to about 70 kms on the Atlantic coast on the estuary of

 

the river. The Gambia has a flat topography, barely varied by a few
undulations, which rarely exceed 30 kms. Figure 1.1 shows The

; Gambia's location in West Africa and the country's major administra-
tive divisions.

The main physical feature is the river, which is one of the
finest waterways in Africa. It has its source in the mountainous
Fouta Djallon in the Republic of Guinea, and it meanders through Sene-
gal before emptying into the Atlantic Ocean. The river has played
a major economic role for The Gambia, serving both as an important
means of transporting commodities to and from Banjul, the capital
city, and as a source of irrigation water for the increasingly impor-
tant rice crop.

The Gambia, one of the smallest countries in the African

continent, is an independent state, a member of the Commonwealth since

 

 

 

 

 

 

Senegambia in West Africa

C3 Senegal
I The Gambia

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I I I

SENEGAL MacCartiy I and

..O

       

 

Keriwan. Division

     
      

  
   

Georgeto \Uppir

1V8!"

‘

. a njul 0

  
   

iJiv

 
  

   
  
   
  
 

bower,River
Sion

   

 

 

 

B ‘ . ./ ‘«-~
We”; western Division SENEGAL
-_ _ ,_ Administrative
Boundary
0 IO . . .
.. , o D1v151onal
km Headquarters

 

 

Figure I.1--Location of The Gambia.

 

 

 

 

 

 

1965 and a Republic since 1970. The boundaries are political and do
not correspond to any physical or ethnic reality, but originate from
colonial times. Early in 1982 the country signed an agreement with

Senegal which established the Confederation of Senegambia.

Background

 

The Gambian Economy

 

The Gambian economic structure has not changed much in recent
years. There are still no known economically exploitable minerals,
and the only sectors of the economy with any potential for develOp-
ment are agriculture and tourism. In fact agriculture assumes first
priority not only because a large percentage of the p0pulation derives
its living from it, but also because the development of agriculture
appears to be the safest and most stable avenue for increasing rural
income and employment and improving the shortage of foreign exhange.
As can be seen in Table 1.1, agriculture accounts, on the average,
for about 28% of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) at market prices.
Trade and government services have provided about 12% each.

In recent years, efforts have been made to diversify the
country's economic base by increasing rice and cotton production,
livestock and fishing, as well as the tourist sector. To the present,
however, the outcome of such efforts has been very modest. Within the
period 1974-75 to 1979-80, the GDP at market prices rose at an annual
average rate of 2.9%. Since population increased at almost the same
rate, GDP per capita has remained almost constant. This slow growth

rate is believed to have resulted from the decline in agricultural

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.m>wummm: mew mmmmcpcmuma cw mwgamwuu
.mLoLLm mcwccaoc mo mmamuma so“ .macm no: has ~ma0ha
mama an: cm mwmmpwu o~.~ u oo.~wm

.Hmmfi .Pawcom
=.mm\mmm~ a» Nm\HmmH «caeao_a>ae _m_uom new awsocoum toe emPa Lam» aswa. .mensma age we depnaaaa soc» waswcma "mumaom

 

 

o.oo~ m.omm a.~ m.-m m.Hem c.0nm m.a~m e.~em m.Hmn m.mm~ meowca “exams um goo
~.- m.mm Am.ov m.mm m.mm v.38 v.om m.m~ «.mu o.~m mmwuwmaam
mast: mmxmu. uumLZuCH
m.m- m.m m.~w~ m.mm~ o.hflm ~.mm~ m.m- m.mm~ o.mm~ «moo Logan» an ace
AH.~V “H.5V e.HH Aa.mv Am.mv Am.nv Av.ov A~.Gv A¢.mv A~.mv mamzmgu Jena voyage“
~.~fi m.o¢ m.mH o.m m.me ¢.q¢ m.~e H.Nm ~.m~ m.m~ maupscam “casctmsom
Aw H.~ H.m o.m m.m m.n m.m H.n m.m m.o m.m mmuw>gmm meuo
m.¢ m.e~ w.“ m.m~ o.mH m.¢H m.mH N.¢H m.m~ “.mfi maawscam .mmmcwmaa .mumpma Fame
N.m m.o~ “.3“ m.~H m.NH H.Hfl m.oH ~.m m.o~ N.“ mucacamcfi use memxcam
m.~H ~.H¢ m.m m.o o.mm ©.mm m.m¢ m.mq m.¢e m.cm aemce
H.o e.o~ m.¢~ m.m m.m~ m.o~ ¢.¢~ m.m~ m.m~ m.mH =o_pmawc:EEoo
ucm .mmmuoum .uconmcmce
o.~ o.m H.~ H.o N.m ¢.oH m.m H.“ G.“ v.a . mucmcaaumac ucm mpapoz
m.m ~.mH m.HH m.o m.m~ m.mm m.e~ N.N~ H.mH v.m~ memacgmso .mcL=.s .cowpuatpmcou
¢.o ¢.H o.m H.o o.~ m.H m.H m.~ e.“ m.~ Lawn: new xuwuwcuuapw
m.m H.mH o.oH ~.mH m.NH N.mH e.NH m.¢~ m.e~ c.m spamsucfi
~.m~ m.¢m aao.mv m.m~ m.on m.NH_ 0.0m m.mofi ¢.~o~ o.~o~ acsupsuecme

 

 

£S£eoaa§8< 38

guzogw meome om\mmmfi m~\mnmfi mN\uan N~\onH mm\mnmfi m5\enmfi
mmmcm>< pascc<

 

 

mflmwmm_mu com

 

 

m mpmwcpcmgmg cw mmgamwuu

: Xme FMHOHQ
n oo.Hw~

.m>wwmmm= m;

.mcocgm mcwv:=OL we mmamumn can Peace no

Nmmfi N0: Cm mmmmeU ONoN

.HmmH ._=n=~m

.mFDEmo one mo uwpaaqmm ace» um>_cmn ”mumaom

 

 

 

=.om\mmmH o» mw\~mmfi unweaoFm>mo Pmmuom vcm owEocoou Low cm—a Lam» w>wu= 11111111111111111111
. mmomga umxcme um moo

o.ooH m.omm m.~ m.-m m.H¢m o.aam m.m~m o.~em m.Hmn m mmw mmwewmasm
“.53 m.mm Am.ov m.am m.mo ¢.Hm V.Gm m.ma ¢.~N 9.5m weeds “axe“ guacwucH
. . umoo Levon» «a use
m.m- m.m m.~m~ m.mm~ o.afim ~.mnw m.m- m mmm m amw mamcmeu xcma uma=QEH
AH.~V flfi.uv v.~H A~.mv Am.wv Am.nv A¢.ov A~.mv Av.mv A~.mv mmup>cmm acme=Lm>ow
fi.~H m.ov m.mH o.m m.mv ¢.e¢ m.~e H.Nm ~.m~ m.m~ . maup>com cacao

H.~ H.~ o.m m.m m.a m.n H.“ m.o m.m m.m .

AW . a W“ mm
m.¢ m.¢H m.H «.mfi o.m_ m.eH m.mH ~.¢H m.mH “.mfi mauwscam mma=_m=n mHMwm=PW=mm
~.m m.o~ N.~H m.~H m.NH H.HH m.oH ~.m m.o~ N.“ aucmcamcm u went»
m.- ~.Hv o.m m.o o.mm e.mm m.m¢ m.mc w.ee m.mm copumuP==EEou
fi.m e.o~ m.¢~ m.m m.m~ m.o~ e.¢~ m.aH m.m~ m.mH ecu .mmwgowm .wcoamcm2e
o.N w.» H.N H.o N.m v.0H m.m H.m m.m ¢.m - mucmuamammg ucm mpmuo:
m.m h.mH m.HH m.o m.m~ m.mm m.e~ N.NH H.8H v.8H mcwaccaaa .aemcvs comauacumcou
e.o e.H o.m H.o o.~ m.H m.“ m.H e.~ m.H cage: ecu suwuwcuua_u
m.m “.mfi 9.9“ “.m_ a.NH N.©~ ¢.NH m.e~ m.¢H c.m xuumsecm
~.m~ ~.em afio.mv a.m~ 0.0“ m.NHH 0.0m m.moH ¢.~oH o.No~ agapfiaumcmq

 

 

npmuOP mo a u::oE< mung
guzocw Hm\ommfi om\muafi mN\mmm~ mm\mmm~ mm\m~mfi wm\mmm~ mmvamH
wmmgw>< Pascc<

 

 

mAmemeu cow_PPEV Hm\ommfl o“ ma\enmm

onDJ._L ~\\D~n4 J:Dan:D) :. :.D..D .D..4n:3:« 333.)

 

 

 

=.om\mmmH on mmxfimmfi ucmsnopm>ma meuom vcm owEocoum Lo; cap; me> m>wu=

o.ooH m.omm a.~

2.: we 3.3
m.o- m.m
RH.NV A~.NV v.~H
H.~H m.oe m.m~
A4 H.~ H.n o.o
m.¢ m.¢H m._
~.m m.oH ~.HH
m.~H ~.Hv m.m
H.m w.o~ m.¢~
o.m w.m ~.~
o.m n.mfi a.flfi
¢.o ¢.H o.m
m.m H.mH o.oH
N.m~ ~.¢m aflo.mv

 

m.n~m
$.mm

m.mm~
A~.mv
m.m
m.w
m.mH
m.-
m.o
m.m

H.o
m.o
H.o
«.mH
m.om

m.~qm
m.mm

m.mm~
Am.mv
m.mv
0.5
o.mH
m.NH
o.mm
m.mm

m.m
m.m~
o.m
m.mH
9.0m

o.mam
¢.Hw

©.afim
Am.Nv
v.e¢
m.“
m.e~
H.3H
o.mm
m.o~

v.0H
w.wm
m.H
N.oH
m.NH~

m.mmm
«.mm

~.m-
Ae.mv
m.~¢
s.“
m.mH
m.o~
m.me
e.¢~

m.m
m.v~
w.H
v.mH
0.0m

.m

m.~vm
m.m~

m.ma~
A~.mv
H.5m
m.m
N.¢H
~.a
m.me
m.aH

H.m
N.NH
m.~
m.v~
m.mofi

m.fimn
¢.~n

m.mm~
Av.mv
~.m~
m.m
m.mH
m.oH
m.¢q
m.m~

0.5
H.oH
w.“
m.¢H
¢.~oH

.m>Pummm: mew wwmmcucwcma c

LoLLw mcwwcaoc we mmamuma oofi Fauna no

mmm~ an: cw mwmmpmv om.N u

.MLDEae age to u_Pa=

c.mm~
o.nm

o.mm~
A~.mv
m.mN
m.m
N.mH
N.“
w.mm
m.m~

v.n
v.mfi
m.H
c.m
o.moH

m mmcamwuu

: xde paycha
oo.me
. mfi ._=ncmm
new wwL$ um>wgmo "mumaom
11111111111111111111

meowca “magma an new

mmwvwmasm
macme moxmu uuwgmucfi

umou Lopumw um moo

mmmcmgu xcma umuaas_

mo9w>cwm «cmecgm>ow

mmum>gmm gmzuo

mmuw>me .mmm:_w=n .mumpmo mem
wucmgamzH new mcwxcmm

mung»

cowpmuPcaesou
vcm .mmmuoum .ugoamcwgh

mucmcamummg new m—muo:
mnwxgcmaa .mcm:PE .comuuauumcou
Loam: wen xuwuwguum—u

auumaucm

mL=HF=UVLm<

 

n—SOP $0 a 9:395 mama
zuzogw
mmmxm>< Fusccq

 

Hm\ommfi om\mmmfi mN\mmmH mm\mnm~ mm\m~mH mm\mnmfi m5\vmm~

 

oflUJ. .i. -\D~\4 3:303?) 3. ...h. .3

o 5. —Jfi-3—J-.4

31-) n)

mflmwmmpmu som_FwEv ~m\ommfl ow ma\vnmfl

 

 

 

 

output which averaged a negative growth rate of 8.0% per annum for
the same period.

Because of the decline in agricultural output and the rapid
growth in most nonagricultural sectors, the share of agriculture in
the total GDP decreased from more than 40% in 1974-75 to less than
30% in 1979-80. The value of eXports also declined from 083.8
million in 1974-75 to D64.8m in 1979-80. Imports, meanwhile,

increased from 088.3m to 0290.4m for the same period (Gambia, 1981).

Agriculture in The Gambia

 

 

Agriculture and its related activities--fisheries and live-
stock--form the heart of the Gambian economy. It provides a live—
lihood for more than 85% of the active population, contributes on the
average nearly 90% of the domestic export earnings, and forms the
basis for the principal processing industries. Table 1.2, which
shows export earnings by commodity for the period of 1974-75 to
1980-81, indicates that groundnut is by far the most important single
cash crop in the country. In addition to being the major source of
rural income, it accounts for more than 75% of the total export
earnings, averaging about 90% in the past seven years. Because of
this heavy dependence on one crop, the country's economic prospects
are highly unpredictable and tend to fluctuate in sympathy with
fluctuations in groundnut income. A fall in groundnut production

resulted in a decline in export earnings of about 60% from 0104.8m

in 1976-77 to a low of D40.9m in 1980-81.

 

 

 

.NmmH an: 2% om.ma 1 00.88“

 

 

 

 

 

 

a . ®\meH
.Hmmfl _:fleem = om\mmmH op N u geaom
pcmEQOPm>ma meoom vcm oesocoum com cm_a me> m>wd= .mwnemo mcH1WM1WWHWHWWWTWWWWIWWWWWWWiiiW11111
. . . . . . . . coax owpmmeoa .mpoe
N om 0 me w mm m om N em 0 mm H mm m mm me pgwqu uzcucsogo &
m.HH o.mH m.mH o.mm o.mH o.¢ m.m m.H mpcogxmiwm
m.me m.oe m.e© m.mw e.e~ m.eoH o.me “.mm mBLOQXm awpmmeOo _mboe
mami- m.m mmwil. mammn. mamnii. AAMii. Namii. m.o mpoznoca cmgpo
m.v ¢.© ©.® m.m 0.x m.¢ ©.N N.H mcoprLwamLQ smww Ucw cmwm
m.o m.o w.o m.o o.H w.o v.0 N.o mp3: ucm mpmccmx EFma
H.oo m.om o.mm “.mm o.mo H.mm m.Hm m.om muosnoxa pzcucsoco Payee -
e.m ¢.m H.m m.m N.m m.eH m.m A.“ axed use _mme beeeezoco
m Hm m.¢a N.¢H “.0H o.mm o.Hm w.HN H.mm umc_mmcc: Fro pzcnczoco
m. . . . . .
mm o NH m mm H oe m mm o mm R.m¢ o.ee ea__meme=\eap_aem pzeeeeoco
mmmmgm>
111 < Hm\ome om\mmmfl mm\wmmfi mu\mNmH mm\ommd ox\mmmfl mm\¢mma

 

 

saumm_mo cop___E, mmpp .. . .. . . .. . . .

 

 

00050000>0o 000uom 0:0 00500060 000 2000 000> m>000

 

 

.0000 00: 00 00.00 H 00.000

.me0 .szcmm =.©m\mme op Nw\0wm0

.000500 0:0 00 00000000 2000 00>00mo

”mumzom

 

 

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 00000x0 00000000 00000

ow 0000xm 0320:3000 0
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.0.0.00 00000x0 00000
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 00000x0-00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.00 0.00 00000X0 00000000 00000
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 00000000 00000
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 000000000000 0000 000 0000
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0000 000 0000000 0000
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 00000000 000000000 00000
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.0 0000 000 0000 000000000
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 000000000 000 000000000
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 00000000000000000 000000000

00000000 0000000 0000000 0000000 0000000 0000000 0000000 0000000

000000000 00000000 00000000000 000000000 00 00000X0--.0.0 00000

 

 

 

 

 

 

00050000>0m 00000m 0:0 00500000 000 0000 0mw> «>000

 

 

.0000 000 00 00.00 H 00.000

.meH .ancmm 0.om\mme ow Nw\HmmH

.000500 000 00 00000000 5000 00>00mo

”mumaom

 

 

 

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 00000X0 00000000 00000

00 00oqu 0000:0000 0
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.0.0.00 00000x0 00000
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 00000x0-00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.00 0.00 00000X0 00000000 00000
mama. MdMii @4011 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 00000000 00000
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 000000000000 0000 000 0000
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0000 000 0000000 5000
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 00000000 000000000 00000
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.0 0000 000 0000 000000000
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 000000000 000 000000000
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 00000000000000000 000000000

00000000 0000000 0000000 0000000 0000000 0000000 0000000 0000000

 

000000000 00000000 00000005500 000000000 00 000oqu--.m.0 m0m<0

 

 

 

 

 

In terms of the overall economy, this means that resources
that are available for consumption, investment, and recurrent govern-
ment expenditure can vary substantially from year to year. Although
the country has in the past adjusted relatively well to this situa-
tion, there is little doubt that the economic costs associated with
the uncertainties involved in the dependence on one cash crop can be
substantial. Foreign exchange reserves and price stabilization funds
in the marketing board need to be built up in good years to minimize
resource short-falls in bad years. Any inadequate reserve build ups
can seriously disrupt imports and investments in bad years. On the
other hand, excessive reserve accumulation can take resources away
from consumption and investment in good years (AID, 1979). The
obvious solution to this dilemma is crop diversification. But the
potential for this in The Gambia is very limited.

The only other significant eXport commodity in The Gambia
is fish and fish preparations which, on the average, have accounted
for a little more than 6% of the total domestic eXport earnings in
the last seven years. Palm kernels, which once formed a significant
part of eXport earnings,an12decreasing in importance with an average
eXport value of less than Dl million. Some efforts are being made to
develop a lime juice industry, but so far only a small hectarage has
been planted for commercial production. Cotton production has also
been encouraged, but the results are disappointing.

Subsistence crops include rice, sorghum, millet, maize, and
cassava. Traditionally, sorghum and millet formed the major food

crops, but in recent years rice has become the most important staple

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In terms_of the overall economy, this means that resources
that are available for consumption, investment, and recurrent govern—
ment expenditure can vary substantially from year to year. Although
the country has in the past adjusted relatively well to this situa-
tion, there is little doubt that the economic costs associated with
the uncertainties involved in the dependence on one cash crop can be
substantial. Foreign exchange reserves and price stabilization funds
in the marketing board need to be built up in good years to minimize
resource short—falls in bad years. Any inadequate reserve build ups
can seriously disrupt imports and investments in bad years. On the
other hand, excessive reserve accumulation can take resources away
from consumption and investment in good years (AID, 1979). The
obvious solution to this dilemma is crop diversification. But the
potential for this in The Gambia is very limited.

The only other significant eXport commodity in The Gambia
is fish and fish preparations which, on the average, have accounted
for a little more than 6% of the total domestic export earnings in
the last seven years. Palm kernels, which once formed a significant
part of export earnings,an12decreasing in importance with an average
eXport value of less than D1 million. Some efforts are being made to
develop a lime juice industry, but so far only a small hectarage has
been planted for commercial production. Cotton production has also
been encouraged, but the results are disappointing.

Subsistence crops include rice, sorghum, millet, maize, and
cassava. Traditionally, sorghum and millet formed the major food

crops, but in recent years rice has become the most important staple

 

 

 

 

 

crop. A study by CRED (1977) shows that for the period of 1973-74 to
1976-77, the actual tonnage of domestically produced cereals declined
and that increases in total land cultivated were mainly used for ground-
nut production. Also, consistent with the decline in local produc-
tion, there was an increasing dependence on the exterior to meet

local demands. As will be seen in the next section, it is doubtful
whether more recent statistics will indicate otherwise. For example,
the value of total food imports has increased from Dl7.7m in 1974—75
(about 19.4% of total imports) to D63.7m in 1980-81 (about 23. % of
total imports) (Gambia, 1981). And in a study of 57 compounds in
eight villages, which compared the 1977—78 and 1978-79 crOpping sea-
sons for farmers participating in a rural development project, The
Gambia (1979) found a decrease of 21% for rice, 15% for millet, and
59% for maize in the 1978-79 season as compared to the 1977-78 season
in terms of area cultivated. Groundnut hectarage remained virtually
unchanged for the two seasons. It is noteworthy to indicate that
similar shifts away from cereals to groundnuts have also been

recorded in Senegal by Craven and Tuluy (1981). They show that from
1959-60 to 1976-77, the percentage of total area cultivated to ground—
nut increased from 48% to 52% while cereals hectarage percentage

decreased from 43.6% to 41.4% for the same period.

Problem Setting

 

Records indicate that rice cultivation in The Gambia started
as early as 1818, but that by 1836 the country was already importing

rice. Quinn (1972) contends that although there was a variety of

 

 

 

 

 

foods available, unproductive methods of cultivation and uncertain
rainfall meant that famine was a continuing theme of life around

the 19th century. Annual imports of rice are said to have risen sub-
stantially after 1857.

In the 1960's domestic rice production increased by about 3.3%
annually or a little more than the estimated population growth rate
of 2.8% per annum. However, in the 1970's rice production actually
declined by an average of nearly 3.8% per annum. Where output
increased, it was due mainly to increases in area cultivated. Esti-
mated yield per hectare declined from a high of 2,079 kgs/ha in 1967
to a low of 1,000 kg/ha in 1980. Actual milled equivalent of paddy
production has dropped from 28,300 metric tons in 1971 to 16,800 tons
in 1980 (WARDA, 1981). What is significant about these statistics
is that over the period of decline, the government had focused on
food production projects more than ever before. From 1975-76 to
1980-81, more than 057.4m was invested in agriculture and most of the
investments went into the development of irrigated perimeters for
rice production.

As was earlier indicated, rice has become the stable food in
The Gambia replacing the traditional subsistence crops of millet and
sorghum. At an estimated per capita consumption of more than 80 kg,
lthe country becomes the third highest per capita consumer of rice in
West Africa ranking only behind Sierra Leone and Liberia. The shift
in consumption toward rice is disturbing because rice is more costly
to produce than the other cereals and it has a high production cost

as compared to rice imports. The situation is even made worse with

 

 

 

 

 

 

10

the downward trend in domestic production and an increasing population
and income. Figure 1.2 shows that the gap between domestic production
and total consumption is widening. Per capita consumption of rice
has increased from an average of 67.9 kg in 1960—64 to 79.3 kg in
1976-80. Rice imports have increased from an average of 9,100 metric
tons in 1960—64 to 26,620 tons in 1975-79. These imports are valued
at 01.9m and 012.5m, respectively (WARDA, 1981).

Although no detailed consumer surveys estimating the calorific
contribution of different food items in The Gambia are available,
it can safely be said that rice contributes a substantial amount of
these calories. Norman et al., (1979) quotes Grant (1950) who showed
that in 1949 Gambian farmers consumed about 1,575 to 2,144 calories
per day per head, depending on the season. In neighboring Senegal,
the average is estimated at 2,300 calories per capita with rice con-

tributing about 30% (Craven and Tuluy, 1981).

Need for the Study

 

Despite their importance in the economy of The Gambia, the
agricultural sector and the rice subsector in particular have, until
recently, received very scanty attention from economists. Agronomists,
sociologists, and anthrOpologists have examined in some detail the
soils, cultural practices, land tenure systems, tools, and basic
techniques used by Gambian rice farmers. Their efforts, however,
have failed to produce much needed basic information such as crop
acreages, yields, prices, and other data that are most relevent for

policy formation. Recent efforts to collect such information, through

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

11
50
'1
----- Consumption A\ I
. . I I
—— Domestic production ,\ , \ l
A 40
1; T
Q1
1'0
.2
3
c,
Q)
... 30
m D
.5:
U)
C
O
*—
'u 20-
E
4..)
OJ
2
U
C
d!
m
8 10.
1:
’—

 

 

1960 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80
Years

Figure 1.2.--Total consumption and domestic production of rice in The Gambia.

 

 

 

12

the Food and Agriculture Organization's agriculture surveys, have
only succeeded in getting rough approximations which are at best
unreliable, although in the context of a developing country such
information can be of extreme importance in the design of a develop-
ment strategy.

Like other West African countries, The Gambia has, since
independence, adopted self—sufficiency of food staples as a national
policy goal. This policy has been chosen in the nationalistic desire
to minimize foreign leverage, reduce foreign exchange requirements for
the import of foodstuffs, and maintain internal political tranquility.
It is assumed that producing rice domestically by any means will use
less foreign exchange than purchasing rice from abroad.

While current efforts are being devoted to increasing the
commercial production of rice, the country lacks microeconomic data
that will assist planners in making decisions that will contribute
to increasing domestic rice production. Outside of studies done by
the West Africa Rice Development Association (WARDA), there is cur—
rently very little information on the economics of rice production.
Most of the literature that is available deals with the agronomy and
genetics of rice production. Weil (1973) indicates that in the early
1950's research on the economics and social problems of rice produc-
tion was carried out by V. 0. Van der Plas in 1955, 1957, and 1958.
Paul Kleene (no date) is also quoted by Weil to have researched
current (1960-1967) rice methods and economics in the Central Gambia.

In recent years, Weil (1973), Haswell (1975), Dunsmore et al.
(1976), and Dey (1980,‘1981, 1982) have all written on SOme

 

 

 

13

socioeconomic aspects of rice production in The Gambia. Weil dis—
cusses the adaptation of the Gambian woman to a changing economy.
He contends that if we are to understand and learn from the success
or failure of development initiatives (rural or national), we must
examine the political and economic dynamics of the societies involved
in these initiatives (p. 20). Weil tries to demonstrate that the
shift in food production among the Mandinka of The Gambia, where the
cultivation of millet and sorghum has been replaced by rice production
by women, is an adaptation in an increasingly commercial economy.
“This," he says, "is taking place by channelling competition for two
vital scarce resources, namely, tidal swamp land and skilled female
labor, through endogenous political and economic mechanisms” (p. 28).
Haswell (1975) examined these political and economic dynamics
through a case study of one village on the south bank of the river
Gambia. The study is based on an initial survey in 1947-49 and
resurveys in 1962 and 1973-74. The changes that occurred in the
village are set against changes in the economy of the country and
West Africa as a whole over a twenty-five year period. The thesis
which emerges from the analysis is that whereas the subsistence
farmer made decisions and faced hardship with weather as the main
variable, entry into the cash crop economy not only brought him into
contact with the world market situation, but forced choices between
cash and subsistence crops and introduced alien concepts<yfliving

standards. She contends that the Western World has compounded the

 

 

 

 

 

14

situation by failing to understand the intricacies which have led to
the institutionalization of poverty through aid programs and other
devices which increase economic expectations and dependence. She
returned to this theme in 1977.

Dey (1980) examined women's and men's control of land, labor,
and the crop in swamp rice cultivation and women's control of the same
factors of production in the cultivation of irrigated rice. She con—
cludes that men have not only benefited more than women from the rice
develOpment programs, but that moreover, the virtual exclusion of
women from the control of irrigated rice production has led to a
partial failure of the programs (p. 1). The subjects of her papers in
1981 and 1982 were further extensions of this thesis.

Dunsmore et al. (1976) reports on the crop and animal produc-
tion practices in The Gambia and on land use and capability. The
results of a detailed socioeconomic study at village level are
reported. 0n the basis of the study recommendations are made which
are aimed at improving food production of both crops and animal
origin for local consumption, increasing exports of crop products,
and enlarging the forest reserve.

Throughout the literature on agriculture in The Gambia, no
attempt has been made to produce an in-depth study of the rice sub-
sector and its relationship to other crop enterprises in the farming
system. The availability of such information is crucial for the
achievement of the goal of food self-sufficiency. This study aims at

providing such information.

 

 

 

 

 

15

Objectives of the Study

 

The main objective of this study is to provide a description
of the major rice productionswstemsand to determine the financial
and economic costs and returns of the different rice production sys-
tems in The Gambia. The specific objectives are to:

1. describe the agro-climatic conditions of rice

production and the social structure of rice

 

farmers in The Gambia
2. identify and describe the major rice produc-
tion systems in The Gambia

3. determine and compare the financial and economic

 

costs and returns of the major rice production
systems on a hectare basis

4. estimate the total amount of resources used in
rice farming and the farm incomes of rice farm-
ers on a household basis by type of predominant
rice cultivation system and by size of land area

cultivated

Research Method

 

The information used in this study forms part of the data

collected on a socioeconomic survey of rice farmers in The Gambia

 

 

 

 

 

16

for the West Africa Rice Development Association (WARDA).1 The main
objective of that survey was to give a description of the socioecon-
omics of rice production in The Gambia and to provide input/output
data of the different rice production systems. Because of the high
degree of interdependence between production and consumption, con-
sumption and investment, investment and resource availability, and
social and cultural constraints (Low, 1978) that is often character-
istic of farming in West Africa, it was necessary to extend the
scope of the survey beyond collecting input/output data for rice sys-
tems alone. Thus data for other crop enterprises cultivated by rice

farmers were also collected.

Sampligg Procedure

 

 

 

 

Because rice cultivation in The Gambia is concentrated in the
middle and eastern parts of the country, the westernmost part was
excluded from the study. The rest of the country was then divided
into ten enumeration areas using district political boundaries. A
list of every village2 where rice cultivation was important in the

farming operations was made for each of these enumeration areas.

 

1WARDA is a regional body charged with the responsibility of
assisting member countries in the subregion to attain self-sufficiency
in rice production through strengthening of their national programs.

2Only villages with ten or more compounds (extended family
units) in the 1973 census were included in this list. Ten was the
minimum number of households wanted in each village. It was assumed
that by 1981 these villages would have had more than ten compounds
to allow for a random sample selection.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

17

Using random sampling, thirteen villages were initially
selected-—one each from seven enumeration areas and two each from
the remaining three enumeration areas. Ten villages was the actual
number wanted, but thirteen were selected to make room for future
dropouts.

A list of all dabada; heads who were certain to cultivate

rice in the season of the study was made for each village. From

 

this list a simple random sampling procedure was again adopted to
select ten farmers from each village. These farmers were to partici-
pate in the survey. At some stage in the survey, three villages had

to be abandoned for reasons ranging from inaccessibility in the rains

 

to poor quality of data collected in the initial stages.

Conduct of Survey4

 

The collection of data started in early June, 1981, when one
enumerator was posted in each of the villages. Stock questionnaires
for land, labor,machinery, equipment, draft animals, productive
animals, and farm houses were collected first. This was repeated

at the end of the survey to capture changes in stock inventory. Stock

 

3See Chapter II for a definition Of the dabada. The dabada
was chosen as a sampling unit because it better approximated the
production unit. More than 80% of the dabadalu were themselves whole
compound units.

4The questionnaires used in the survey were adapted from the
Food and Agriculture Organization, Farm Management and Data Collection
and Analysis System (FMDCAS). For details see K. H. Friederich,
Farm Management Data Collection and Analysis: An Electronic Data
Processing, Storage and Retrieval System, Farm Management Unit,
Agricultural Services Division, FAO, Rome, 1977.

 

 

 

 

18

questionnaires for credit and crops were completed at a later date
in the survey.

Resource utilization (flow data) for all farm activities were
collected on a twice weekly basis. This started at the end of June,
1981, and ended at the end of June, 1982. This approach was employed
to collect the flow data because of the lack of household labor time
allocation data. Several authors including Spencer (1972), Norman
(1973), Tollens (1975), and Kearl (1976) have all discussed methods
of data collection in developing countries. The choices concerning
the number of days of recall (frequency of interview) to be used often
reflect a trade-off between sampling and measurement errors (Lynch,
in Smith et al., 1979). Time and cost considerations are also relevant.

All labor input was measured in hours with differentiation
made in terms of sex, age, and type of labor—~family or hired. Machin-
ery and animal inputs were measured in terms of hours, and other
material inputs such as seed and fertilizer were measured in terms of
quantity and value. A yield plot method was used to determine yield.
Yield plots of approximately 3.35 and 6.70 meters square were laid on
all swamp and upland fields respectively. As much as possible,
harvesting, threshing, and winnowing of the yield plot output was done
by household members or supervised by them. The weight of the dry
produce was taken when the produce was brought home and dried. Thus
yield measures represent the actual yield that reached home. Adequate
precautions were taken to ensure that the yield plot produce was not

mixed with other produce.

 

 

 

 

 

19

Area of fields was taken either during or soon after harvest
and represents area planted to crops even though it might not have
been harvested.

At the end of July, 1981, one month after the start of the
resource utilization data collection, the attempted rebellion in The
Gambia brought all work to a standstill. Scared enumerators left
their villages for about two weeks. When things returned to normality,
about mid-August,enumerators were asked to estimate, in cooperation
with the farmers, all inputs and outputs for the farming activities

for the period for which data were not collected.

Data Preparation

 

From The Gambia, the completed questionnaires were sent to
Freetown, Sierra Leone for punching into cards. The punched cards
were air-freighted to Monrovia before being shipped to Michigan. Once
in East Lansing, the data were copied onto discs and edited. All
information belonging to farmers who did not have complete year—
round data were discarded. The edited data were then copied onto a
magnetic tape for permanent storage and retrieval when necessary.
Subsequent analysis of the data was carried out within the limita-

tions of FMDCAS as described by Frederich (1977).

The Analytic Approach

 

The choice of an analytic approach depends primarily on the
purpose of the study, the quality of the available data, and time and

cost considerations. The nature of the problem addressed in this

 

 

 

 

u u‘-
I-- n;-
Ctr. .- I\H

of an ente
as a whole
to the WM
regirdles:
Who in the
to income
Profits be
difference
their ya],
11
agreement
0f determ‘

 

 

20

study calls for a system of analysis that will present reliable
estimates of the costs and returns of the various crop enterprises
considered. To this end, a financial and economic analysis technique
has been employed.

Both systems of analysis provide a framework within which
all aspects of a given enterprise or farm can be evaluated and coordi-
nated in a systematic manner. Basically, the financial analysis
identifies the money profit accruing to the enterprise and is con-
cerned with the return to equity capital that is provided by the
farmer. Financial analysis takes into consideration income distribu—
tion and capital ownership.

0n the other hand, economic analysis measures the effects
of an enterprise or farm on the fundamental objectives of the economy
as a whole. Thus, attention is diverted to the return or productivity
to the whole society of all the resources committed to the enterprise,
regardless of who in the society contributes them and regardless of
who in the society receives them. Economic analysis is thus neutral
to income distribution and capital ownership. The differences in
profits between financial and economic analysis is a result of the
differences in the items considered as costs and benefits and in
their valuation.

It is worthwhile to note that there is a lack of general
agreement on both the need to use shadow prices and on the method
of determining the shadow prices in economic analysis. Items to be

included and excluded in either the financial or economic analysis

 

 

 

 

have gener

:riate far
Tne

assmtior

this equil‘
prices ShOl
market fai‘
Part of the
possible tr
valuation a
generally S
that the us
cumstances
decreasing
toriments If
we“ of i
in mind, ti

economC ar

 

 

21

have generally not provoked a lot of controversy as in the need

for and method of shadow price determination. Market prices are used
in valuing inputs and outputs in financial analysis, while shadow
prices, sometimes called accounting prices, are said to be appro-
priate for economic analysis.

The argument in favor of using shadow prices rests on the
assumption that in a competitive market the price of a good tends to
that level at which the quantity supplied is equal to the quantity
demanded. This is the equilibrium price and at this price resources
are said to be efficiently allocated. Problems arise when the market
forces are constrained in such a way as to prevent the attainment of
this equilibrium price. In this case it is advocated that shadow
prices should be used. However, Weckstein (1972) argues that although
market failures may be responsible for social loss and constitute
part of the barrier to economic development, it is not generally
possible to mitigate these failures by using shadow prices in the
valuation and that there is no known source of shadow prices that
generally gives better guidance. Weckstein concludes by stating
that the use of shadow prices can under some unfortunate set of cir-
cumstances contribute to a further fracturing of an economy and
decreasing of efficient project choice (p. 492). Gittinger (1972)
comments that shadow pricing is a very tricky and controversial
aspect of the economic analysis of projects (p. 38). Bearing this
in mind, this study will, nevertheless, use shadow prices in the

economic analysis when appropriate. Like other authors, with no

 

 

 

source 0‘
:2 arrive
act
Euigsts ar
reaps ci a
(harsh e:

efficiency

period, ,5

Che
Emphasis r
femers ll
sample ho.
productio.
System an
the finan.
on a hect
categom
hOlding 1
flndlngs

fer futur

 

22

source of shadow prices, certain simplifying assumptions will be made
to arrive at reasonably appropriate prices.

Both the financial and economic analysis are based on budgets.
Budgets are prepared by stating the income, expenses, and resource
needs of each enterprise of the farming business on a per unit basis
(Harsh et al., 1981). They are formulated primarily to evaluate the
efficiency of a particular productive activity within a prescribed
period, usually a year (Brown, 1979). Budgets are prepared to
reflect comparative performances under actual conditions for the

study period rather than for the purpose of optimization.

Plan of the Remaining Chapters

 

Chapter II presents a description of the study area with
emphasis on the agro-climatic conditions and social structure of the
farmers included in the sample. Some major characteristics of the
sample households are also presented. In Chapter III the major rice
production systems are identified and described. The rice marketing
system and pricing policy are also described. Chapter IV presents
the financial and economic analysis of the rice production systems
on a hectare basis. Farm income analysis on a household basis,
categorized by preominant rice cultivation systems, and size of land
holding is given in Chapter V. The last chapter is a summary of the
findings of the study, policy recommendations, and some suggestions

for future research.

 

 

 

' ‘ Ff
Writes a ..

Bambi: is a

The
and eastern
included in
Vitsnsive n
River 0mg,-
one Village,
We than te
Kirantaba lo
”M Healt

nurse suPeri

 

 

CHAPTER II

A DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA

Introduction

 

The main purpose of this chapter is to describe both the
physical and social characteristics of the study area. Because The
Gambia is a very small country and spatial mobility within the country
is unrestricted, the social characteristics tend to be similar in all
villages. The little variations that do exist are of minor importance.
Except for rainfall variations the physical structures are also very

similar.

Location

The area included in the study covered much of the central
and eastern part of the country as is shown in the location of villages
included in the survey in Figure 2.1. The area covers much of the
intensive rice cultivation regions extending from Geneiri in the Lower
River Division to Hella Kunda in the Upper River Division. Except for
one village, Karantaba Tobakoto, all villages in the study were not
more than ten kilometers away from an all-weather motorable road.
Karantaba Tobakoto is about 30 kilometers from the nearest all-weather
road. Health centers equipped with qualified registered nurses or

nurse superintendents are scattered throughout the country in such a

23

 

-3.-. -\3)33...N A L
Unfi- bii 3N, ,-

 

 

24

 

.>m>gzm ecu cw nwcm>ou moc<su.~.m mg:m_d

 

 

acmmcmm u w
mmmam n a Amocax opzdv ug_m maamm :mzmcmx u o
czoummcomu n u Aeneax mmcmvcozv mcwm anamm cazmcmx u m
mocww n m mcwccmw n e
_=wcmm n < mn_—mxm¢ u m
acczx m—pm: n cg mpEmm Lgmx u N
ouoxmnc» manucmxmx n m _gwm:mu n H
abczx >m_=x:mm u m maze» segue u a. .
mueax spud czmuczx u m Am>c=m on» em vmw2_u:m momm__m> u . .xmx
. .qmzzsu-.dzoa V “n
Ex
on g
.3. no
‘lk Q
Auqomzmmv

 

 

 

 

 

«Hmz<u m1»

 

 

 

 

 

manner the

to react a

has been a

Cortrcl ir

ta Octobei

Atlantic 3
to reach
to the ea
Table 2.1
weather 5
I“ 1981 a
for the e
I
In Banju‘
high of
this are

898.....-

January

 

25

manner that patients do not have to travel for more than 40 kilometers

to reach a health center.

Physical Characteristics

 

Climate

The Gambia is within the Sahelian Zone, and since 1974, it
has been a member of the Permanent Interstate Committee for Drought
Control in the Sahel (CILSS). Like all Sahelian countries, its
climate is characterized by a long, dry season, which lasts from
November to May, and a short, rainy season, which extends from June
to October.

The mean annual rainfall is 1,056 mm in Banjul along the
Atlantic Coast. Rainfall declines progressively toward the interior
to reach 868 mm in Jenoi and 832 mm in Sapu. It then rises again
to the east reaching 936 mm in Georgetwon and 999 mm in Basse.
Table 2.1 shows the mean annual rainfall and August means for some
weather stations around the country. Histograms of actual rainfall
in 1981 and ten day normals for two stations together with isohyets
for the entire country are also shown in Figure 2.2.

Rainfall in The Gambia is very variable from year to year.
In Banjul rainfall has ranged from a low of 561.8 mm in 1972 to a
high of 1,628.8 mm in 1968. Records show that annual rainfall in
this area decreased by 30% from an average of 1,053 mm in 1943-46 to
898 mm in 1978-81.

The average temperature in The Gambia varies from 25°C in

January to 30°C in May. However, from December to February the

.

o
v

r

n .3 «\J m U.-
. .L 4|
r/._ r. . v u n —>1
5. Q a.» CV a

u v. Pl J .. .. h. i. . t.

. .— 7» .. . » . 3U .i .5 .b.

:J _ r . e. W». A . .\. a

lfi p :u 2. «C .t :u a.»

. l I . u.» . . ..\~ A .u . K. .5

 

 

 

 

26

TABLE 2.1.-~Mean Annual Rainfall and August Means

 

 

 

Distance a August
Weather Station from ggggfivagions Mean(3£?ual Means

Banjul (km) (mm)
Banjul -— 38 1055.8 (279.9) 395.7
Jenoi 184 16 867.6 (183.0) 277.1
Sapu 284 15 832.3 (206.1) 255.1
Georgetown 306 59 936.1 (194.0) 286.1
Basse 382 36 998.6 (196.6) 310.3
Source: Derived from The Republic of The Gambia, ”Monthly Rainfall

Data for The Gambia to 1980," 1982, and from ”Report of

Annual Rainfall 1981," 1982.

a . . . . .
Figures in parentheSis are standard deViations.

 

 

7... x - . Z x 3.... ._ - . ..
I to. - c \ {I /l\ \ \\. \ .. L n/ C.
4.4;! \\ I. -. I luv..- i. N .l Ix 3.:..|\.‘~..l.lné.ul.l I: .l.
l\ i A .’ .‘ .tt‘ti_li 7 II. 5 — /|\
pf< \ \.\ I 5:11 I .1}
/ 3...- a \x...: . .. -\- - l- 8
FCKL . . \ .\ -i\\..l i...)- l I- -II 9.:

1:5: 35:..7: ....:.:< .._:.LL>< < 323.1)» : . _. .x ... .\. .\- -\\.

 

 

 

 

27

 

.HmmH .F—mwcwmm Poacc< mmmcm><ii

.m.m weaned

 

       

 

5%... :a-o_\ 5.35. 292 C

ZBOFmomome

mmmqm
so :3. e: :2. as“. 2:

Co Emu on< :2. uzan >5.

     

 

 

 
 

  

 

         

ow

ow

 

on
8

    

8..

ow—
o:

    

552

 

 

 

 
 

.6... N: “S 393....

9.6.58.3 5... 2.3.335...
a. .3 339...... rtotou \a. .

coop 2.33 Sauce 28 n3 . :02

    

   

EaONROVSON 9w

 

 

am \31...

“55:359. .353 wumem><3<az<o a: 2. a.

 

 

 

 

 

ninirur te
ranges are
pera'w res

narrattan-

until Acri

S: is and
A
re;:r:ec
low it pl
fror sand
to the he
soils flak.
fertilize
ability g
Table 2,}

dassifh

Vegetati
OI gulle
Which co
some Sig
Table 2‘
by who

0V9)“ til

 

 

28

minimum temperatures can reach as low as 15°C (Diurnal temperature
ranges are greater in theeast than in the west). The cool tem-
peratures at this time are due to a dry northwest wind--the
harmattan-—which begins in December and continues intermittently
until April. These cool winds are known to seriously affect the

yields of dry season irrigated rice.

Soils and Vegetation

 

A survey of land resources carried out in 1972-73 and
reported by Dunsmore et al. (1976) shows that the soils are generally
low in plant nutrient levels throughout The Gambia. Texture varies
from sandy, sandy loams, and clay loams found on the higher ground
to the heavy clay alluviums in the river flats. The nature of these
soils makes them generally responsive to phosphate and nitrogen
fertilizers, including animal manuring. An estimation of soil suit—
ability groups over the entire country gave the figures shown in
Table 2.2. About 40% of the total land area in the country is
classified as suitable for agricultural production.

The structure of the soils and man's manipulation of the
vegetative cover is said to have facilitated an increasing amount
of gulley erosion in various spots throughout the country. A study
which compared aerial photographs taken in 1946 and 1968 revealed
some significant shifts in the country's ecology as is evident in
Table 2.3. Although the validity of the figures has been questioned
by UNSO (1979), the data do shed some light on the general trend

over time. The most important of these are: a rapid depletion of

 

 

 

'
v
a

0'-
as".
I'd—

 

 

 

29

TABLE 2.2.-~Soils Suitability Groups

 

 

Soil Group Area (Ha) Percent of Total
Unsuitable 355,115 34
Marginal 126,127 12
Suitable with qualification 147,781 14
Suitable 326,344 34
Suitable and Irrigable 81,116 8

 

Source: J. R. Dunsmore et al., ”The Agricultural Development of
The Gambia: An Agricultural, Environment, and Socio-
Economic Analysis," Land Resource Study 22, Land
Resource Division, The Gambia, 1976.

 

 

 

 

Table 2.3.
%

lecetatior

7‘
a n
a a- _

L Awe. u

3 Savann
' -".'\v‘!‘
53'

in

‘ LO‘n u‘u
ar

c

YA’

W:
\
P "n.

6 WOW
7 Contii
\

SOURCE:

 

 

30

Table 2.3.—-Changes in Vegetation Cover

 

 

 

 

 

Vegetation and Land Use Description 1946 (%) 1968 0%) Changea
1 Forest (Complete ground cover
by trees as viewed
from above) 29.9 3.4 (25.5)
2 Woodland Savannah
(Tree canOpy over
50-70% of ground) 31.3 4.6 (26.7)
TOTAL (1 + 2) 60.2 8.0 (52.2)
3 Savannah (25% of tree canopy) 14.0 17.6 3.6
4 Thorn and small trees (marginal
areas usually not suitable
for annual crops) 7.8 31.7 23.9
5 Low bush shrub (some low bush
and shrubs, visible bare
soil/erosion) 0.4 19.9 19.5
TOTAL (4 + 5) 8.2 51.6 43.4
6 Cropping with fallow 17.6 5.5 (12.1)
7 Continuous cr0pping 0.0 17.3 17.3
SOURCE: Derived from AID, "Gambia Soil and Vegetation Management,

.Project No. 635-0202, 1977.

a . . . .
Figures in parentheSis are negative.

 

 

 

3he nation
all y usefu
ping with

:ro:;ir.g (

her study

subdivide:
The Civisi
tric-ts are
‘J'i‘l‘, is t."
entity. '3
Who is ger
Cldlh'lng (
comlUrlity.
A
m e.
This is u
the villa-
Wl a:
tea Cons‘
Patriljnei
°f the SM
Tl

dates an .

 

 

31

the national forest area (60% to 8.0%), a rapid increase in margin-
ally useful agricultural area (8.2% to 51.6%), a reduction of crop-
ping with fallow (17% to 5.5%), and a rapid increase in continuous
cropping (0.0% to 17.3%). Haswell (1975) found similar trends in

her study of Geneiri.

Social Structure

 

The Gambia is divided into six divisions which are further
subdivided into thirty—five districts for administrative purposes.
The Divisions are governed by appointed commissioners while the dis—
tricts are headed by elected seyfgs (chiefs). The dominant social
unit is the village which forms a cohesive political and economic
entity. The leadership role in the village is played by the alkali,
who is generally the eldest male of the senior branch of the lineage
claiming direct descent from the original founder—settlers of the
community.

A common and very important feature of all villages is the
banta_ba, which is a raised platform usually under a large tree.
This is the meeting place for male elders of a village. Internally
the village is divided into two subdivisions: wards (kabilolu, sing.
kggilg) and compounds (kgrgg or sub). The Rabilg_varies from a few
to a considerable number of gorges. The core of a kabilg_is a
patrilineal kin group emphasizing mutual solidarity between members
of the same line.

The kgrgg or sug_is the basic residential unit that accommo-

dates an extended family group with an average of about eleven persons.

 

 

 

Boundarie
force the
or M
psi-fall,
in is tr
complete
He is by
village.
determine
in the kg
'3
hark grOL
among the
0f smalls
larger E
ins tends
lying tee
increasec
econOmy_
theSe SUV
QUarreis
l”am-3N fi

Persons |

the same

 

32

Boundaries between kordos are often separated by a fence to rein-

force the privacy of the kordo. The head of the kordo (kordo-tio

 

or suo-tio) is usually the eldest male member of the family and will
normally be succeeded by his next eldest brother or son. The kordo-
jjg_is traditionally in a very powerful position in that he maintains
complete authority over the social and economic affairs of the family.
He is by right a member of the elder age group (keba_kafg) in the
village. IThe status and caste of a kordo-tio's family background
determines, to a large extent, the power and prestige that he holds

in the keba kafo. The kordo may be divided into subunits of

dabadalu and/or sinkirolu or it may operate as a unit.

The dabada, the basic production unit, is a semi-autonomous
work group within the larger family structure. Gamble (1958) was
among the first persons to identify the existence of several types
of smaller family units based on brothers and uncles within the
larger gorge. Since then several researchers have noticed an increas-
ing tendency for_kgrdg§ to fracture into smaller kordos. The under-
lying reasons for this development are said to revolve around the
increased contact with the outside world and the monetization of the
economy. In this study, reasons given by respondents for forming
these smaller units ranged from a desire to be independent to
quarrels between brothers. The number of dabadalu within a kordo
ranged from 1 to 6 with an average of 1.4. The average number of
persons per dabada was 7.8.

The sinkiro forms a group of people who eat together from

the same pot. Usually a woman or group of women undertake to cook

 

 

 

for a ClEl
of a ran,

the sarpll

 

diagrars,

and sinki

f!‘

after the
wider str
boy's E
Circumcis
stretches
last one
called 53
h
a l’OUng y,
elder won
I
mentary f
km labc

than for

 

 

33

for a clearly defined set of people. ltsimple sinkiro might consist
of a man, his wives, and their children. The number of sinkirolu in
the sample averaged 1.4. Figures 2.3 and 2.4 show a kinship diagram
and a_kgrdg layout diagram, respectively. As illustrated in the
diagrams, in very large families the relationship between dabada

and sinkiro can be very complex.

Age Grades (kafos)

 

Every Gambian villager belongs to an age set from which he
progresses through a structure of age grades (kafos). The age sets
are made up of peer groups which have an age range of five years.
Boys and girls join an age set at the age of between 8 and 12 years,
after they have undergone circumcision. Above these age sets is a
wider structure of age grades called kafgs. The first is a young

boy's kafo (ding ding messengo kafo) to which a boy belongs before

 

 

circumcision. The second is the young men's kafo (kambani kafo) which

 

 

stretches from the early teens to approximately thirty-five. The

last one is the elder kafo (keba kafo). The leader of each kafo is

 

called keba-tio.

Women kafgs are more loosely organized. There are basically
a young women's kajg,before marriage, a married women's kafo, and an
elder women's_kafg.

The_kafg used to be an important organization as a supple—
mentary farm labor for farmers who requested it. Recently, however,
kafg labor has been called upon more frequently for public works

than for farm work. Supplementary labor on women's rice fields is

 

/ / / 5:5:
I \ . Vail-523v
x .1- i //-- «\3 .- .2-

y /
{:3 3 _ < .1 ./C 3. x \\ / mm \

 

 

 

 

34

 

.Ewcmmro Qwsmcwx “mcossm .mncsx cmmmz--.m.m weaned
.ommfi .._m pm mgoEmcso ”moczom

P

 

III II MMUQDND < “NOV
m 35cc=ob
0 0mm 0 0.95.
l man-SEE L M 22..

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

new: acaooEoo c5: 9: “.8095 :5, 5505 ”9.3.5:; "$20 9: .2229... mi 20:5 36 “we; 9.2568 .336 9: = .n New
3.? 3.: m3 5:: nimcozfioc
03.0 3.3033 cm .0 8283 com .3930.» on. do mar-mm. new 3.3% 9: o. .3..an one: 9.3863 9: .0 5586 .mev as... .w 32:... :2 m men-EB. mmumzm
56$. .0: 5:0 Sm .2».ch 63o 55> 33633 .39.. .088 3:33 Sentient? 8m moon ..< .m N 8526
93368 9: :5; .326 as}. 9362... Ucaanoo 0: 9m 92:. .v m mmvunmo
was... =~ 2... 9953 «9.85 .n J vw cozm .aoa
. _
350cm o. 9an N uca _ 3823 .0 2360.2 .055» 0:0 2 95.3 n 838 do $350.2 .N Etc-axons. 99:32 0.30
. w - mm? . . . . .
c .Ezwhcou v.5: 09.655. 955 95.6
. mow m m mm c: E . ,
*0 >=E£ “$5.323 :95 m 2:3 58 30 >32 05 on? “5505 N m2 nmwc Ocaanou on: on: a m U3 D m z w h... p 3:3. 3me ucaooEOU
852 965m 32.5
M 83.5 N 83.5 F 338
\i\ \I l l I «I /
\ / /
l l l 11 \ /
\ 333 28 3393 can /
. / \ n N

 

 

\ 0.35“." NCO \ 024:5 0C0 / \
l l -I ll - BEE. mucm: .-
\ \ / I, \ 1‘ Cl u m

MN /
\ $2.8 wmcgmzfl / \ \\ /
/

0°
N

\

 

. m
. \ _ \\ /
’ mm nv R _ mm vm mv \ / mm mm
/ a / O l Dam: \

a m

vm
/0 Ill 0 l / // .mv lllllll O N \ \ ./ / ncaoquU \
/ / I. llllll / I llllll

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

G’— u:‘| _ | 1.7 .Iv‘l 3.1.0; 1E!!! 50 v: t» ....... .Uifi-xl .H G . V—
5232". 2 it. a?! 26° 1.2!}. .xzxkulx-u 2. '15.. _ a n 0% u
26.5.72253 95:1. .30.. 35.16:» E 011.: .. .3151..- "
flusumzm u ‘ ,
. 09...! 73.6.1. 05.53.
Ir-g

 

 

 

35

.vcsoaeou map «0 Emgmmwo Hmcwgsm

.mucax ommmz--.¢.m mgsmwm

.QNQH «.Fm #0 GLOEWCDQ

”wucsom

 

 

 

 

«333 92 9.53.8. oficfi 9.5 €509.80 «E. c. «3ch N Be 205.

8.09. co._.v£~u::8 92 8:05 .9:ch v5 35c.«§E£.o.95u
S. van — 5 50906533". 9.5003 «.30 I: .398 «3:9. .3

8.3.69 Ba 32. 932a .2 8.. «8:8 .3
99a .6. 5.23 B. 8.. Bacon. .2

.8253 omega. 3 83: d—

is .83 8. 8:2 813m ._ .

h 3823. .0 €9.20. .0—
“ .o 8.38 as «£3 .3 8:2 9.386 .m
n .2 58.85% .m
32 239:8 .o 3:65 .3959» .o 68.. 9.3333; 9.185 N

 

n 853

39. 2:868 2: .o on; 2: e? 8 86.3.
5:9: a 82m «03: «i .m .0 56.20 u:- nsmt. 3 8:9. 9:386 .o
.6595 .0930» «.39. 389.80 .0 83... we; .m

w 638
3.2 E68 3 E88§m J.

8529 .0950» «baa... .0 «03>»
9: 55. 3.2» .23. «.22 839:8 B 58.05.”; d
5.3.5 .2 is «=3 :8 «.22 283.8 .0 3:2 9.83 N
2.8.338. «5:3 22 3:868 B 36: .—

p 333
£02

 

 

I 38:3 «use;
a 5%.?

g

8:8 95:3. 83:5

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

\ .....
“3.9...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

oauo; Gunugn'

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.o.
I llllllll ql
I .
(I \\
llllllllll / /l|l|||l.\
I
.
. . .
® " . . . . .\ \ 833%? B... 3.52
. u .. N... \ v.
058.98 . . .. .. \
.1953 u . \
.

«unique «.56

flux.

 

 

 

 

 

 

. 85. .383. 95:5

 

 

 

usually ;
frai her

when reqx

Squgrag!

excluding
annua} a
rated at
aeooie ;
There an
42.31 of
and 9.52
had an e

FUR, an

the 15 t
force, a
4 years

rest.

The DOpU
included
FOF exam
7'1 Deep

irrigate

 

 

 

36

usually provided on exchange bases. A woman simply requests help
from her age set or friends and will be expected to return the help

when required. This mmfll work group is called barikiyo.

Demography
In 1973 The Gambia boasted of a population of 493,499,

excluding 1,082 people referred to as temporary residents. At an
annual population growth rate of 2.8% the 1980 population was esti-
mated at 603,000. This puts the population density at about 53
people per square kilometer, making it the highest in West Africa.
There are various ethnic groups with the Mandingo making up about
42.3% of the population followed by Fula and Nollof who form 18.2%

and 9.5%, respectively (Dunsmore et al., 1976). The sample population
had an ethnic distribution of 69.1%, 16.4%, and 14.5% for Mandingo,
Fula, and Nollof, respectively.

The 1973 census showed that 47% of the population fell within
the 15 to 49 years age group bracket, constituting the main labor
force, and 25% were between the ages of 5 and 14 years. Those under
4 years of age constituted 17%, and those over 50 years made up the
rest.

The structure of the sample population is shown in Table 2.4.
The population has been categorized by sex and age for each village
included in the study and for each predominant rice growing region.
For example, Kuntaur Fula Kunda had a sample average family size of
7.1 people of which 3.3 are males and 3.8 are females. In the

irrigated rice growing region, the sample average family size was

>...:.c_ wee:— :_. a. I. ix \.
2:3 l .
l . ...li..ll .l 1.. . ll . :ER

lllll l l l l Adz—2.; 21.25.... «were» prQI — v
EO—QQPJQOk .HpQE-um

 

 

.33 Lo eLzuuaLuw--.v. N 92::

 

 

 

.37

4444444>44 44444444 444 44444444444 :4 44444444
44454444; 44 4444 444444444

 

 

 

 

 

4444 44>444 ”444444
.i.«llllllllllllllllllllll lllllllllllllllll
444.44 . . .
4.4 444.44 444 44 444 44 444.44 444.44 444.44 444.44 444.44 444.44 44444
4 4 4.4 4.4 4.4 44.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 44
444.44 444.44 444.44 444.44 444.44 444.44 444.44 444.44 444.44 444.44 444444
4 4 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 44 4442444 4444 444444444
444.44 4.4 444.44 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 444.44 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 4 44444 44444
AON HV H.N ROO.HV m.¢ m.o 0.0 m.m 0.0 Amn.ov w.~ m.o 0.0 N.N OH ouoxmnOh mawuchmx
444.44 4.4 444.44 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 444.44 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 4 44:44 44444444
444.44 444.44 444.44 444.44 444.44 444.44 444.44 444.44 444.44 444.44 444444 4443444
4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 44 4444 44:44:44 42434
444.44 4.4 444.44 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 444.44 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 4 444444 4444 .4 4434444
444.44 4.4 444.44 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 444.44 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 4 444444424 4444 .4 4434444
444.44 4.4 444.44 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 444.44 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 44 44:44 4444 4444444
444.44 4.4 444.44 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 444.44 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 4 4444444
444.44 444.44 444.44 444.44 444.44 444.44 444.44 444.44 444.44 444.44 444444 .
4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 44 4443444 4444 4>oc4ewz
444.44 4.44 444.44 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 444.44 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 44 44444444
444.44 4.4 444.44 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 444.44e4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 4 4444444
444.44 4.44 444.44 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 4444.44 4.4. 4.4 4.4 4.4 4 44444 4444
444544 444:
44444 444444 444444\444444>
444444 4444544 444444 44442

 

co4444saom w4454m 0:» 4o mgsuozgum--.¢.m 44444

 

0f one se
derlsion
tion affe
‘Hlthout l
WOmen allc
any VlHa

l
agrlCUltL

Fillet. a

 

 

 

 

38

7.2 people, including 3.6 males and 3.6 females. For the entire
sample the average family size was 7.8 people. About 67.5% of

these were in the 16 to 60 age bracket, 15.6% in the 10 to 15 years
bracket, and 10.8% were less than 10 years. The rest was made up of
women older than 60. Women made up about 51.6% of the total popu-

lation.

The Role of Women

 

Women have played an important part in the economic develop-
ment of Africa and in recent years a lot of research efforts have
been devoted to studying their role in agricultural development. The
usual factors characteristic of women in the Muslim society exist in
The Gambia as are to be found in other African countries. In the
village community men and women play distinct and separate economic,
social, and political roles. These roles are not seen as overlapping
nor are they competitive, rather they are complementary. Each sex
has its clearly outlined duties and spheres of influence. A member
of one sex encroaches on the other's territory at the danger of
derision and sometimes even ostracism. However, no important func—
tion affecting both sexes can take place in a village or be complete
without the participation of both sexes. It is necessary for both
women and men to perform their own, separate duties in order for
any village activity to be successful (AID, 1979).

This separation of roles extends into life as well. In
agriculture men usually cultivate dryland crops-~sorghum, maize,

millet, and groundnut--while women are responsible for rice

 

 

 

.‘ .4
71:.Sn. 1
\n4‘

fix '1:
ml»; .

”an: her
than to
With 0X-
tion of
areas, a

bigger s

more in
not agn
been f0
at the

Siatist

\

Cialjza

 

 

39

cultivation and in the past, the famine crop, :iflgg.1 In addition,
both men and women cultivate vegetable gardens. Since men clearly

take first and senior place in this kind of arrangement, on account
of their control of the cash crop, it has been assumed by outsiders
and even by many Gambians themselves that development plans should
involve men and that female's role is minor since it is secondary.

It is assumed that benefits will "trickle down" to the less fortu-
nate women.

This trickle-down approach has unsurprisingly provoked
sharp criticism from several writiers on The Gambia. Among them,
Haswell (1975), Weil (1973), and most recently, Dey (1980, 1981,
1982) have been most prominent.. All generally agree that develop—
ment benefits in The Gambia in recent years have accrued more to men
than to women and that the introduction of groundnut as a cash crop
with ox-drawn implements has resulted in men neglecting the cultiva—
tion of cereals. Consequently, and especially in the rice growing
areas, a heavier dependence has been placed on women to provide a
bigger share of the family food.

Although Mettrick (1980) agrees that men have benefited
more from the oxenization program in The Gambia than women, he does
not agree with the conclusion that the effect of oxenization has
been for men to reverse the trend toward concentration on groundnuts
at the expense of other cereals. Unfortunately, Mettrick has no

statistics to support his statements, but Lowe's (in Dunsmore et al.,

. 1See Chapter III for a more detailed discussion on the spe-
Cialization of labor by sex along crop enterprise lines.

 

 

 

 

 

I .
~Ar ( I
NJ :. - .

tion of
a neate:
women a
0i agri
ditiona
cultiva
and the
tive fc
gram j,
to chal
resDun

exampl

EidESt

 

 

40

1976) findings tend to corroborate Mettrick's contention. In his
study of farmers in The Gambia, Lowe found that the pattern of female
labor use between oxenized, manual, and control compounds was very
much the same. In all cases he found that there was a greater expendi-
ture of male than female labor. AID (1979) argues that focusing
development attention on women and nonirrigated rice may lead to
women's greater economic efficiency, but that this could lead to a
profound influence on the role and function of women within the family.
"The commercialization of rice production,u the report suggests,
”will tend to increase the amount of time spent on back breaking
labor“ (p. 22).

With the increased research interest in the socioeconomics
of Gambian agriculture and as more data become available, the ques-
tion of women's participation in the development programs will remain
a heated subject of debate for years to come. There is no doubt that
women are continuing to play a significant role in the development
of agriculture, especially rice cultivation in The Gambia. The tra-
ditional sexual division of labor (with women specializing in rice
cultivation), the increasing commercialization of rice production,
and the increasing contact with the outside world, make it impera-
tive for women to be an integral part of any rural development pro-
gram in The Gambia. The society has demonstrated some flexibility
to change. In recent years women have been called upon to assume
responsibility that was hitherto a traditionally male domain. For
example, about 11% of respondents in this study indicated that their

eldest wives will assume leadership of the household in case of death

 

 

 

 

 

 

following
groundnu‘
groundnU'
cated tn.
obtain f
Heads of
NOTen CD
Only 500
fro: the
is never
sane hOu

\\

men will
they pay
tradj th
rests Or
to COTltr

 

 

 

 

 

41

of the current head of the household. This compares to 37% and 52%
for those who said that the brother and eldest son, respectively,
will assume the leadership role. Also about 42% indicated that their
wives were the most important person influencing their major deci-
sions. This is contrary to the traditional view that women should
be seen and not heard.

In the irrigated rice cultivation areas, most heads of house-
holds (about 68%) indicated a desire for their wives to participate
fully hiirrigated rice cultivation. However, almost all respondents
in the sample were against women having complete control over a
groundnut field. Reasons for this negative attitude varied from
following tradition, to difficulty in cultivating both rice and
groundnuts, to expressed fears that women will use the income from
groundnuts to file for divorce. 0n the other hand, about 66% indi-
cated that women can sell up to one-fourth of the rice output they
obtain from their fields without accounting for the income received.
Heads of households will generally not buy rice from their wives.
Women contribute their rice, as part of the family food voluntarily.
Only about 7% of the respondents indicated that they will buy rice
from their wives if need be. Also, family labor, including wives,
is never paid for working on fields belonging to males within the

same household.3

 

3This is contrary to Dey's (1980) findings who reported that
men will usually buy rice from their wives for family use and that
they pay their wives for working on their fields in Saruja. In the
traditional society, the main responsibility'flmcfeeding a family
rests on the head of the household, but every family member is obliged
to contribute either in the form of labor, in cash, kind, or both.

 

 

-‘r
“0.:n LU
.Q-fi;§
&::.:C A
.. ':. —

' V DIV“;

‘\
"F’r~.l
9""WUI.

institu‘
ing agr
attenti
1980's
Gambia,
Vidual
that lc
0f the

have t(

The la

 

 

42

The implication from the foregoing discussions is that for
women to achieve economic independence, development programs in The
Gambia will have to concentrate on programs specifically directed
toward improving the crop of women, which is rice. However, the
repercussions on the family structure will have to be watched very

carefully.

Land Tenure

Land in The Gambia has a social importance beyond its use as
a productive resource. And as indicated by Upton (1973), the area
controlled by any community represents the territory, the space for
living, and indeed flnehome of the individual members. The literature
is replete with arguments for and against the communal system of
land ownership, but it is not intended to review that here. Eicher
et al. (1980) state that the conclusion that communal land tenure
institutions are flexible and not an immediate constraint on increas-
ing agricultural production is outdated and call for increased
attention to be paid to landtenure and land use policy issues in the
1980's and 1990's. Whatever attention is paid to these issues in The
Gambia, it is doubtful whether land reform in the direction of indi-
vidual ownership is needed at this time. It is recognized, however,
that long-term plans which take into consideration the total welfare
of the community including education, health, urbanization, etc., will
have to address the land tenure problem.

Land in the provinces of The Gambia is not individually owned.

The land is owned by the government. Individuals or groups simply

 

 

 

9
AP“ nah
g ‘ rind
- . -
.-
.\ '-
: al--Iv
. 4.-— '-
\.\ $- "
v '5. I
. .
1: r- r
rub \
o .
A‘. ';A.
v s...

o 6
‘ ".2 “.
by s :5 \-
:m- r~
\- | 4.
Hr

SUI‘pe l‘

 

43

have use rights. The land is vested in and administered by the dis-
trict authority. The distribution of rights to use land among the
local people is governed and regulated by local customary laws and

is usually the responsibility of the alkali, The present land tenure
system has been largely determined by historical factors. The first
patrilineage to move into an otherwise previously unoccupied terri-
tory receives exclusive use rights to the land after making sacrifices
to the deities. A village is then born. All other immigrant families
arriving later are given land by descendants of the original patri—
lineage. The founder—settler patrilineage or patrons (langsarlu)
grants land to the new patrilineage or clients (falifalu) more com-

monly referred to as strangers (lungtango).

Land Allocation

 

Around the 19th century the allocation of land was closely
associated with the caste system in that the langsarlu in the past
used land allocation to reinforce caste hierarchies. Poorer land
almost invariably went to members of low caste compounds. However,
as Lowe (1976) points out, the emphasis on caste is slowly dying out
although residuals of its effects are still perceived today, pri-
marily in marriage customs. The importance of land as a source of
local political power is also diminishing, and the accumulation of
wealth through trading and money lending has begun to usurp tradi-
tional methods of achieving and maintaining influence.

The mechanics of land allocation are straightforward and are

summarized by Lowe. Each village has an identifiable area of land

 

 

 

 

”r a C0
~IOP‘.F '9'
n_' '1‘ u

w; '4' 4
V b V

c
4.
ll
(‘1.
4 I.
t )

Q

QB“ :“:l

u \- u y“\

"-'\AA a.
b h

51'”. V

Elders i

 

44

(in a community sense, there are no physical boundaries) that falls
within the jurisdiction of its own alkali. The alkali has the
authority to allocate land to a lungtango. At the end of every year
each kordo-tic makes a symbolic return of lands in his control to
the jurisdiction of the alkali, who then has power to retain these
lands. This authority is rarely enforced.

Any kordo-tio has a right to clear land outside the village

jurisdiction if it is unclaimed by any other community or persons

 

and attach it to the store of land used by the kordo. That particular
piece of land is held in perpetuity by the kordo that cleared it, and
the alkali has no claim on it. The kordo-tio has the right to reallo-

cate any of the kordo lands to outside individuals either to people

 

from other BEHIBEE in the same or neighboring village. No other mem-
ber of the kakaa has that right. Allocation of kakaa land to out-
siders is usually done on a year-to-year basis.

Although the village communities are strongly Muslim, the
inheritance procedures, where land and other possessions are divided
among sons upon death of a kordo—tio,areiwn:fOllowed as far as land
is concerned. Upon death of a kordo-tio, the kakaa lands are inher-
ited by the succeeding kordo-tic. Thus, while fragmentation might be
a problem in land use, existing parcels of land are retained intact

without further divisions.

Allocation of Land Used by Women

 

Because of the exogamous and patrilocal marriages, the

allocation of land to be used by women in rice cultivation is not

 

L__—___

 

 

rcllnfall,
able to
“049th;

fa mers

 

 

45

as straightforward as described above. It, however, demonstrates
certain flexibility in the land tenure system.

There are three main channels through which a woman can
obtain rice land. The most important source is the husband. These
are usually lands that were being worked by the mother-in—law.

Since young men usually stay in the same kakaa after marrying, the
fields are thus left in the same kakaa. The second source is from
the woman's parent's kakaa. In most cases these are fields that were
previously being used by their mothers. These fields are mobile

since they can be returned to the woman's original kakaa , if
requested, because of shortage there or in the case of divorce. These
same lands could be passed on to the woman's daughter when the
daughter marries, thus transferring the use rights to a third kakaa.
The third source is rice land on loan from another kakaa.

Allocation of Land to
Strange Farmers

 

 

The strange farmer is a migrant farmer and a source of labor
to the kordo-tio. In 1930 the total number of strange farmers in
The Gambia were estimated at 50,000, and around 1976 they were vari-
ously estimated at between 12,000 and 17,000. The numbers are
believed to be steadily declining because of the unpredictability of
rainfall in recent years. This has made groundnut production unprofit-
able to strange farmers when one considers both monetary and non-
monetary costs. In the sample there was an average of 0.2 strange

farmers per household.

 

 

 

 

A-

pA—QOo-F

.—
S-
cu
r9-

01
C)

heil in
'icinit
exaands
The fol
villagl
given:

et al.

Lowe (
notes
locat.
limit

Sltua

 

46

In return for three or four days of labor per week on fields
designated by the kordo-tio, the strange farmer receives an alloca—
tion of land for growing his own groundnuts, food, accommodation,
sometimes tobacco, use of farm implements, and the product of his
work on his field of groundnut. At the end of the season the migrant
returns home. He usually provides a gift to the kordo-tio as a recog-

nition of his host's hospitality.

Land Use and Land Use Pattern

 

Both Weil (1968) and Lowe (1976) found a system of land use
that followed a more prosaic pattern based on facility of access.
Weil indicates that land is first brought into use in the immediate
vicinity of the village settlement area and land use consequently
expands in concentric increments as a result of population increases.
The founder settlers, langsarlu, utilized the land closest to the
village, and the later arrivals, generally of a lower caste, were
given more outlying and less fertile land to cultivate. Netting
et al. (1980) discerned a similar pattern of cultivation in West
Africa: house gardens, intensive nongarden cultivation, and non-
permanent fields at a greater distance from the house.

Because of the geographical specificity of certain crops,
Lowe qualifies the concentric pattern as described by Weil. He
notes that most of the 24 villages included in his study were
located on the colluvial soils where the range of soil fertility is
limited. Sorghum, millet, maize, and groundnuts would usually be

situated in the immediate vicinity of the village and the bulk of

 

 

n. "?

,
1'” C
UV ‘v

v 5 pa

: s s“.
uh: CUu
or . r
av:

found 1
The (:11

dry See

 

 

47

the rice crop is restricted to the alluvial areas along the river.
It is, however, true that where population pressure had absorbed all
of or most of the colluvial soils, new immigrants would be allocated
holdings on the less fertile soils of the lower plateau and plateau
soils.

The land use pattern as practiced today more closely follows
the pattern described by Lowe. The amount of land that any kakaa
uses irrespective of caste, is a function of the size of the kakaa
membership and the agricultural technology used. Kordo members that
have above average wealth are usually able to command extra labor and
thus increase their total hectarage. Table 2.5 shows the average
area of each crop cultivated by village and region as found in the
present study. For the whole sample, the average area cultivated
per household for the 1981-82 cropping season was 2.24 ha. Of this
area, 39.3% was devoted to groundnut production, and 29.9% each
was devoted to upland cereals and rice cultivation. The rest was
devoted to cotton production.

The mangrove rice growing region, with the highest average
family size of 9.9 persons, had the highest average area cultivated

of 2.90 hectares.

Summary

This chapter is a description of the agro-climatic conditions
found in The Gambia and the social structure of the rice farmers.
The climate is characterized by a very short, rainy season and a long,

dry season. The soils are generally infertile and are said to

 

 

 

A42:
flooL‘
.- r43: paw u:—

D 4.:
TL»... 3:

 

Y's—2... 4 .—
.23

I ill Ill‘lhl'i

To. 4 .244 L.._
XL:

-__>—Fq]-t

44:... _ 4:

I .4 2
{>24 .4: CI

:45 .43:

A......p...4€:v C..L< SCL.» E-.&z

C . 22..

44x45).

4. _ 92.4.1234. kfil

EDITLC¢

{0.35: ft E

£4.44. 43...; vCDOku 4.2,.“

{4.4.4.444 x0 coo—1.34:0 mzoxu cc

lllll 043:4”?

C04 3m.2\1?4.~ 4 4)

€n~L< n...?a..Ln.-)p\n I .m .1. .4 ~5<k

 

 

 

.4444444>40 04404444 m44 44444444444 44 44440444

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4440 Xw>4=m “444444
444.44 444.44 444.40 444.44 444.40 444.40 444.40 444.40 444.40 444.40 444.44 444.40 444.44

44.4 44.4 44.4 44.4 44.4 44.4 44.4 44.4 44.4 44.4 44.4 44.4 44.4 44 44444

.llllldqumql .444444 .444444l .444.44 -- .lunl .444404 .Nmmqm4 .Nmmnmq 444.40 444.40 444.44 444.40 .l. 444444
44.4 44.4 44.4 44.4 .. -- 44.4 44.4 44.4 44.4 44.4 44.4 44.4 44 4444444 4444 444444444
44.4 44.4 .4444 .4444 .4444 nuwl .nul wand .4044 .mmqm wand 4nd. 44w. .mmqm 4m. 44444 44444
440.40 04.N 00.0 40.0 40.0 l- ll -l ll 04.0 40.0 ll ll 00.4 04 ouoxmnop 4044:4444
444.40 44.4 44.4 44.4 44.4 .. -- 44.4 -- 44.4 44.4 44.4 44.4 44.4 4 44444 44444444

444.40 -- 444.44 444.44 444.40 -- -- -- 444.44 444.40 444.40 444.40 444.40 444444 4444444
00 44.4 -- 44.4 44.4 44.4 -- -- .. 44.4 44.4 44.4 44.4 44.4 44 44444 4444440 44444
n4 .ll. .ll. llll llll. lll lll. lll. llll. .lll. llll. llll. llll. ll. 444440
.Awmqwammqm -- l- .. 44.4 -- -- .. 44.4 44.4 44.4 44.4 44.4 4 4444 .4 4434444
4004404420
444.44 44.4 .. .. 44.4 44.4 -- -- .. 44.4 44.4 44.4 44.4 44.4 4 4444 .4 4444444
400.44 00.4 ll 0N.0 ll 40.0 ll ll ll 00.0 ll m~.0 ll 04.0 04 40:44 44:4 4:44:04
444.40 44.4 -- -- .. 44.4 -- -- -- 44.4 -- l- .. 44.4 4 4444444

444.44 -- 444.40 444.40 444.40 444.40 444444
44.4 -- -- l- .. 44.4 -- -- 44.4 -- -- 44.4 44.4 44 4444 4444444:
3 lHl l..l.l HI .Hl 4.444 Ml Ml @414 Ml .Hl W40 l44.lo .% 44.444444
444.44 44.4 .. -- -- -- 44.4 -- .. 44.4 -- -- 44.4 44.4 4 4444444
4444.44 44.4 -- -- -- -- 44.4 -- l- -- -- -- 44.4 44.4 4 44444 4444
“Mm“. 444wwwm 044444MMW 444444Mum unfiflmw 4>MWWW4z 444440 44444 4444: 4440444 umwhma umnhww ucawuu 4wmwwm 444044\444444>

:44: 44444 4444muuozv 444< 4440 :44:

 

04444400: 444 404041 044 404444> An 0444>44400 44440 44 444<

m004w><ll.m.w m0m<4

 

 

 

 

; 4
JVU:5.I‘

a“d land
SDOHtane
h'tigatl‘
statutor
to any a
hastenl'n

 

 

 

49

respond well to fertilizer application. The land tenure system is
of the communal type where land cannot in principle be sold or
rented.

Despite the country's high effective population, land is not
yet an exceptionally scarce resource. Less than half of the agri—
culturally suitable land is under cultivation at the present time.
However, although there is still a high percentage of fallow and
uncultivated land, the pressure on this resource base is becoming
evident. Fallow periods have decreased from the traditional 10 to
20 years to 5 to 7 years. The increased p0pulation pressure, incen—
tives to grow more cash crops, and the availability of ox-drawn imple-
ments to work more area with the limited labor supply have all
resulted in progressively shorter bush-fallow periods. In some areas
today, many farmers are practicing almost continuous cultivation.
This increasing pressure is likely to lead to social conflict over
land rights unless methods are introduced which will increase yields
per hectare.

It should be noted that as the agricultural systems change
and land acquires value, tenurial practices adjust, often in a
spontaneous and almost insensible manner. They may be recognized in
litigation and legal precedent long before either customary or
statutory law includes them. This gradual process may be preferable
to any attempt to institute individual rights in land as a way of
hastening intensification. Though no one should expect a painless

and automatic transition in the socio-cultural factors of household

1..
O .v

o u
.Ao

n
.-
haw»

F

Ada

0---

04"

 

 

50

and village organization of land tenure rules, it seems apparent
that these institutions show some degree of correlation with agri-
cultural systems and that individuals,when given a choice, may act
so as to bring about change that adjusts their social behavior to

an altered set of ecological constraints and options (Netting et al.,

1980).

 

 

 

and p

CODtE

 

CHAPTER III

A DESCRIPTION OF THE RICE PRODUCTION SYSTEMS
AND THE SEXUAL DIVISION OF LABOR

Introduction

 

The main objectives of this chapter are to identify and
describe the major types of rice production systems in The Gambia and
to discuss the sexual division of labor in crop production.

Five major types of rice production systems are recognized
throughout The Gambia. The distinction between the systems are based
on their differing ecological characteristics and cultural practices.
Subtypes of the major systems are known to exist, but they vary more
in degree than in kind and the names and descriptions attached to
them are often regionally and ethnically dependent.

The Gambia is unique in West Africa in that there is a dis-
tinct, though not rigid, division of labor by sex which follows crop
enterprise lines. In other West African countries, sexual division
of labor in farm operations is usually along activity lines with
women performing the jobs demanding less strength and men concentrating
on the more difficult and strength-demanding jobs.

Also in this chapter a description of the marketing mechanism
and pricing policy for rice and groundnut will be presented. The

contents of this chapter sets the stage for the financial and economic

 

 

 

 

.........

 

52

analysis to follow, but first, a comment on labor measurement and

input and output aggregation is in order.

Labor Measurement

 

Labor is the most important single factor of production in
traditional African agriculture. However, by its nature, analysis of
this factor of production has in the past presented some problems and
to present there is no universally accepted method for dealing with
it. There is a need to distinguish between the amount of labor
available, a stock concept, and the amount of labor actually utilized,
a flow concept.

The definition of how much labor is available is somewhat
arbitrary depending on who is included in the labor force and how many
hours they are able and willing to work. The size of the family
labor force depends upon the age at which children are expected to
help on the farm and in other productive activities and whether women
and old persons are included. In The Gambia, the definition of the
farming household affects the size of the stock of labor. The size
of labor of the kordo, encompassing the extended family system will
differ from that of the gabaga_which more closely approximates the
nuclear family system. The latter, which is used in this study, will
invariably be smaller than the former.

In like manner, the hours available for farm work per person
per year depend on the number of hours individuals are prepared to
work and the extent of their off-farm commitments. This means that

the size of the labor force and the hours worked will depend on

 

 

 

 

 

 

V--
-- -
:3 :
.: r:—

tion Fe
by Kant
measun
appl ic.

thEy 1']

hour 0
There

factor
faCtOr

child,

 

 

53

customs and traditions, attitudes toward knowledge, leisure, and
income. As Byerlee et al. (1977) indicate, one cannot use conven-
tional measures of labor utilization, such as labor force partici-
pation and unemployment rates in rural Africa, where most of the
population is self-employed in producing largely for home consumption.
Almost all the adult population partiCipatesirithe labor force at

some time of the year and a negligible proportion of the labor force
is unemployed and seeking work.

For most purposes the use of labor hours or labor days have
been found to be satisfactory. It is usual to assume, regardless of
actual work habits, that eight hours are equal to one labor day.

This system is the one adopted by UwrFood and Agriculture Organiza-
tion Farm Management and Data Collection System and has been used

by Kamuanga (1982) and Eponou (1983). The limitations of this unit of
measurement are apparent. Workers vary in skill, strength, and
application, while jobs to be done on a farm also vary in the demands
they impose on a worker (Dillon and Hardaker, 1980).

The practice is sometimes adopted of measuring labor in man-
hour or manday equivalents, applying arbitrary conversion factors.
There is no general agreement on the magnitude of these conversion
factors. Norman (1973), for example, used the following conversion
factors: small children under six years = 0.00 man-equivalent; large
children, 7-14 years = 0.50 man-equivalent; male adults, 15—64 years
= 1.00 man-equivalent; female adults, 15-64 years = 0.75 man-
equivalent; and men and women over 64 years = 0.50 man-equivalent.

Spencer et al. (1976) on the other hand, used the following

 

 

 

are be
1'S sor
lS asg
aSSl'gl
inpUt

measu

 

54

conversions: adult-equivalent (over 19 years) = 1.5 youths (10—
19 years) = 2.0 children (under 10 years). Also in 1979, Spencer
et al., used 0.75 male hour = 1 female hour = 2.0 child hours. The
weights were based on relative wage rates. The weakness of these
approaches is that for some tasks a woman or child might be at least
as effective as a man and it could only be for tasks involving
physical strength and endurance that such conversions would apply.
As Brown (1979) puts it, experience throughout the world has
shown that it is a fallacy to assume that a woman's or child's
effective output is less than a man‘s, for jobs on the farm are
highly specialized. In a study on the farming systems in the high
altitude areas of the Ankole district in Uganda, Ssentongo (1973)
is quoted by Brown as presenting a photograph which showed the out-
come of a contest between a farmer's wife and a male extension worker
in harvesting fingernfillet. 'Huanmle extension worker is said to
have lost the contest both in the quantity harvested and the quality
of the product. Ssentongo's comments were that "you just cannot
beat a professional” (p. 53).
Strictly speaking, when conversion factors are used, they
are better worked on a task—by-task basis. This method, however,
is sometimes impracticable. Notwithstanding the above comments, it
is assumed in this study that family members would ordinarily be
assigned to jobs according to what they do best. Thus, all labor
inputs are given equal weights. Although labor inputs were originally

measured in hours, the total hours for each labor input category have

 

 

.‘..... .
)v \r
C

pa -

'Vluo

.

0 a n

.In— fl

3 u B U

P‘

I \p-u'
K-u‘lc [h
M

IS re

Obtaj

 

55

been divided by eight to obtain a measuring unit referred to as

1

workday in this study.

Input and Output Aggregation

 

All input and output coefficients used in this chapter were
first converted to units per hectare for each field and each house—
hold. Aggregations were done by weighting each input or output by the
field area before obtaining a weighted mean. Thus the averages used
here are different from the simple means that are obtained by summing

over a variable and dividing by the number of observations.

The Rice Production Systems

 

Lgfland Rice

 

There are two different types of Upland rice in The Gambia,

namely Tandakos and Bantafaro. Tandako is rice grown on upland soils

 

that are under free drainage. The soils are generally sandy to
sandy clay, and are of moderate fertility. They are known to be
highly responsive to nitrogen fertilizers but their water retention
capacity is very poor.

Tandakos are mainly found in the western area where rainfall
is relatively high and extends over a longer period than is

obtained in other parts of the country. The total potential area

1Workday as used here is equivalent to Manday as defined in
K. H. Friedrich, Farm Managerment Data Collection and Analysis (1977),
p. 53. The term "workday" is preferred over Manday because it does
not give the impression that a conversion factor(s) has been used.

 

 

..
..
*A—

has

I995 a]

potent

OJ
()1

sica
Iands.
CUIIUI‘

study

0.20 h
Iower
Table
with a
tribu1

Cent

56

is estimated at between 4,000 and 15,000 hectares, but they are
often confused with associated mangrove swamps which require leaching
before planting.

Bantafaro, which literally translated means outside the
swamp, refers harice grown on shallow depressions that accumulate
water during the wet season, through rainfall and runoff water from
the surrounding higher grounds. The depressions are bowl-shaped
so that the accumulated water is often shallower on the edges and
becomes progressively deeper in the center. They more closely resem-
ble the "bolilands" of Sierra Leone. The soils are hydromorphic and
are of moderate to heavy alluvial clay which are often rich in
organic matter as a result of silt deposit from the runoff water.

Although bantafaros can be found throughout the country,

 

they are more concentrated on the Eastern third of the country. The
potential area has been estimated at between 8,000 and 10,000 hectares.

Basically, bantafaros are a transition zone between the dryer upper

 

lands and the wetter lower lands. Because of their similarity in
cultural practices, both tandakos and bantafaros are considered in this
study as one type and are labelled as upland rice.

The average area of upland rice cultivated per_dabada was
0.20 hectares. Except for dry season irrigated rice, this area is
lower than any of the other rice systems analyzed. As is shown in

Tablel3.1, upland rice had the lowest total labor input per hectare
with an average of 253.8 workdays. Of this amount, family labor con-
tributed about 98.7 percent, strange farmers put in about 0.1 per-

cent, while hired labor contributed 1.1 percent.

:m
....
»::.:_c_v sac“
.c:

Ll:

.vllII'li‘l I IIIIIIIYD a

u... . C.._LL_

. . 9‘ IIII|JII§IIII

<—
A.m.rc V \\
Axm.\o:_v \c\m

XL:
.. c. 2 £2.12... 51

0:?» g 0) ..

cc

Acm.::cv c::_

Acc.c V cm
Ax:.m¢ov can.

CREE-u:

Ame.¢v v we
ca-.mmmv awn"

ou_z vce_a:

QLQLTQCV

c£\wax

m£\wmx v~cm>
wet: Ewu~

m<m<h

 

 

'Il‘u. OI.6|‘III'|II '

:3. u LITCLL

cl pba—>.h

30.: 5:

 

dCCLbLk..Q 0:0 :0

come a::a30\uanc~ so xte;:5w::.~.h

 

 

.comamm Nm\fiwmfl mcu cw woven gmusvoca ummucogasom
.Nme mm: :P mwmmpmo o~.~ u oo.ku
.mmcm came 8;“ mo mcompmw>mv ugmccmpm oz» cwguwz ppm» nose cm>wm a wo «one umum>_p~=u anon: mupoawmao; mmcapocmo

.umm>cm; cmptm mmm__w> mg» op muzuocn mcwucogmcocu Low zpcwms umm: mew mucwsawzcm czwcvuxo new gmzoa Pmewc<n
.mcowumw>mc ucmucmum mum mammswcmcma cw mmcsmwam

mama xv>c=m ”mucsom

 

 

 

Hm.o Hm.o Hm.o fim.o Hm.o m¥\mwma~mo apsauso to auaca mama Etna
om.m mw.m ¢N.N mm.~ om.m vz\um?mapmo mum; mom: mmwcncmucm
AmH.ov om.o ANH.oV NH.o A©N.ov mm.o Aem.ov om.o Aos.ov oN.o a: aaca ammta><
mm mm mm Hm «H uammmmmms mu_o;aw=o= co .02
came Pmsmcmw
7
:5 RN em -- -- mc\mgaox cmppwh Lmzoa
-- .. NH m -- mgxmcso: nu:w5aw:um xo
.. .. NH m .. a;\mg:o: ngmzoa ~mec<
m.oH m.m~ ~.NH ~.H~ m.~ m;\aamexzoz emcw:
v.0 m.o~ 0.0 m.mH m.o m;\m»aexcoz weaseaa macatpm
H.N0m m.ow~ m.mHm H.e~m e.om~ m;\maeexcoz »_PEaa some: to
AHH.eNNV ~.¢Nm Amo.NMNV o.fimm Am¢.HHHV o.m~m Ame.mmmv H.Hmm Amw.mmfiv m.mm~ m;\mamuxcoz cones _mpoc
mm eH o o o w;\mmx Lm~wpwucma
ma AmN mm V an we Amm.m V om Ame.ee v we w;\mm¥ auscumwm
Aom.ofiqfiv amem A-.~mm~V Beam AmN.mmmv cams Amw.mmmv wNmH afififi.mmmv onH a;\mm¥ epaw>
pm: . xgo
mowm m>ocmcmz ogmemm auwm vampa: awn: EmuH

wuwm vmuwmmch

 

msmumxm cowuozvoca wowm mo moaxp newcmwmmo as» no mama “sau29\uzacH mo xumsE=muu.H.m m4m<h

 

 

 

A1
‘ up... a
or ! Ia v.“
0'0- 1: -.
ivJ‘v d
0‘

"‘"‘ "~A|
F“P‘.F . :u—v VB-
U U J

. a c. '-
o
URFOr fl _lv~d:.
Ail. \- -
‘ won'-
"' 't.
b’ \- v
.
K‘.‘ 5;0\': of; Q
“:': ~~~~ » v »
‘
' “‘" 2: ‘r; r:
"3 5.... u- . y
‘. -fl .
‘T‘P‘ ‘ H a ‘
.-,._ \ Lu~ “V \—
-
-. -
-~\««-‘ k.~-:~ ‘Q
T :‘ ~ xuuyu_~

““ r‘. |;‘ “ “"\
w-CJ“. \cllt. :

37' n'El‘iCuIture re
‘nn' Q \i‘ 2 '2 In
C L M \urIt

"‘ “A
.
'ul 3

1‘5 because t

seeds Preserved f

.

“he Corbi
reQUired 0n the E

andlower than 8‘

Citing
Uhnning, BAG bi]

Two Headings at i

 

58

The cultivation season for upland rice started from early
June and extended up to the end of January. Figure 4.1 shows the
nonthly labor profile for upland rice cultivation. There were two
monthly labor peak periods,in August and November,which corresponded
with the weeding and peak harvesting periods, respectively. The

month of August had the highest labor demand period per hectare.

Land_preparation and planting --The land is usually cleared

 

well before the start of the rains by brushing/slashing and burning.
As soon as the rains start and when the ground is soft enough, the
land is dug to a depth of about three to four inches. Planting is by
direct broadcast of pregerminated seeds at an average density rate of
46 kilograms per hectare. Only moderately drought tolerant and short
duration varieties of about 90-100 days are planted. The Department
of Agriculture recommends the use of Se aggg, Se_§1£§, Se 319G, IR 528,
and Soavina varieties for upland rice, but these are rarely used by
farmers because they are seldom available. Instead, farmers rely on
seeds preserved from the previous season.

The combined operation of land preparation and planting
equired on the average about 70 workdays per hectare. This was

ower than the other two main activities in upland rice cultivation

nd lower than similar activities in the other rice enterprises.

Care and cultivation.--Care and cultivation includes weeding,
hinning, and bird scaring after broadcasting and before harvest.

wo weedings at about four and eight weeks after broadcasting are

 

 

 

 

J

ENH-

. a
p». .
.urllI
AU: ..
I \ .v
AU
u to . .
. 5 4 P . I III! II|I|I|II .. .

h
I
..~ ’~ .

LLZ. T... Li; ,.>..:4LC:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

59
80 ’ 75.8
71.5
60
40
32.2
23.9
18.9
20 .
12.3
10.9
7.6
0.9
. L f—" ‘
V J F Ii A M J J A S C) N D

Figure 3.1—-Monthly Distribution of Labor per Hectare in Upland rice

Months

Cultivation.

 

 

 

 

Adar

TETaIrEC' .nvu—
I

rf'r'v‘" 7' Tr;
‘V -

P! --

'AA 0 ‘ ,‘I’. ,-

."-.b'vd— J'- n ‘ "

' §‘A'-
"‘3. Fr ($n\
v h. 9' ' usuvv
.
_ - --,__ *r'
op ; - ~
I - -v - i
.K'.
.-
Cc).
—:" 3:0.
5 ‘5'.
_—_
:V" :1‘;r-;- '
v " V i» u_- ..
n-1' ".-‘-‘ "*" :r-
. “‘8 U \
- u
:\r«-\ “:F‘A 3‘
' “ w nu ~ _
-
Q ‘ .
:r: '2-‘ "‘ ‘r;
,‘ ‘ 5 ~
~
-F~ '.:r-.‘n‘.fl‘
V s. a \ I ,_
b~~ '5-
- .
\‘ 3A
A" abs“- U ‘n‘fll‘
V J» 1 P
s
a
"C ".2
"y t h

W58, h0wever, h

A»;
n . Y‘c _
t“a'~ repsi;e.

”Ce grown 00 f

 

 

60

required. Moderate bonding is sometimes practiced as a means of
controlling the water. Chemical fertilizers are rarely applied.
About 94 workdays nearly 37 percent of the total labor requirements
per hectare, were utilized in care and cultivation, and except for
the dry season irrigated rice, this demand on labor was higher than
the demand on labor for similar activities in the other rice sys-

tems.

Harvesting.--Harvesting of upland rice started in November

 

and extended up to the end of January. The rice is ready for harvest
when matured and practically dry. Harvesting is done by cutting
single panicles with a small knife. leepanicles are tied into bundles
and left in the field until the end of the day when they are collected
and transported to the village for storage. 0n the average, a total
of about 90 workdays per hectare were used for harvesting upland rice.
The yield per hectare averaged 1,327kilograms. This was the
lowest among all the rice enterprises analyzed in this study. It
was, however, higher than the 780 kilograms and 962 kilograms per
hectare reported by Spencer et al. (1979) for upland rice and hand
boliland rice respectively in Sierra Leone. Upland rice and boli-
lands in Sierra Leone have similar ecological characteristics to the

upland rice in The Gambia.

Bafaro

Bafaro, which literally translated means inside the swamp, is

rice grown on fresh water marshlands along the upstream two thirds of

 

 

 

.

‘ a F" r

~r: ’5‘" 14:. . .

vi Tut

’ - _

‘. -rfi- .r~ I
Chg. |.uJ L - 'V

V

a -P -
K A I». '- ’.
Arv- I .
ulu v I». y and
. .
afiOAFOQI: .';: s
‘Us: -..-.l C we I
-
.- n n .
P_ C3“.
...5 \-
. - O
AAAAA Q I-
t- -r,_\ r- \
\wuu ~_ _
_ -
..........
I \-\ ‘4- an"
i“ -v— a» u y
—.——__
“ -~-' os .‘ .
|-'— F:- “ 7‘
“‘ \V vs 5 - ~
I - %.
’22-:P“ A-

A
‘“ "'W '~ a». no

(I)
I

r
0
CI
r
(,1
Y

I9?” periods occ
r5599C1T\'er. ‘

”.7 workdays.

EM?
emi’ part of U
by Power (mm.
any Compact SCI
and Sevtember,
workdays Der he
labor demand De

the Othey‘ flit:

 

61

the main river, or marshes along the tributaries which are further
away from the lower bed of the river. The fields reach various levels
of submersion periodically from the tides and river floods. The soils
are of rich clay and do not need much fertilizers. The estimated
potential area is about 12,000 hectares.

The average area of bafarg_cultivated per gabaga_was 0.50
hectares. This is second only to mangrove rice among the rice enter-
prises. _§afarg had the highest demand on labor per hectare when com-
pared to the other rice systems. 0f the estimated average total
demand of 361 workdays, family labor accounted for about 89.9 percent,
strange farmers accounted for about 4.4%, and hired labor accounted
for about 5.8%. The cultivation season for bafarg extended from
late May to the end of January. The monthly labor profile in
Figure 3.2 shows two labor peak periods in August and December. These
peak periods occurred at the time of intense planting and harvesting
respectively. The month of August had the highest labor demand of

71.7 workdays.

Landpreparation.--Land clearing and cfigging is done in the

 

early part of the rainy season. Some of the fields can be plowed

by power tillers. The land is puddled by hand and feet to break up

any compact soil and bury some weeds beforerflantingsiarts in August
nd September. 0n the average, land preparation required about 114

orkdays per hectare. This was more than 31 percent of the total

abor demand per hectare and was higher than similar activities in

he other rice enterprises.

 

 

..,s

an»

LL 1.

. .:

h-wa—

..\, ~.s»J..~:s\_

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

62
80'
71.7
64.8
60.6
50. 56A
46.7
E
.8
g 40.
I
L
8
Q’ 20.8 21'7
if 201
O
'3 13.C
4.1
o 3 r-J

 

 

 

 

 

J F' M l\ M J J A S 0 N 0

Months

Lgure 3.2——Monthly Distribution of Labor per Hectare in Bafaro rice
Cultivation.

 

 

 

 

 

_("
or ’0'» ‘
r .4') I' ' T I”
.
.- r-
1‘!” R’ ;\
IWV ‘33. c' T" k.
.n' ::
P r-o "P "T
.-

A 6"“-.. I.
.n- ICwfl‘ :_.:: ‘
a
- F‘
a. v ‘I
‘cl :~. qqk: v
v

:.= - :‘ ' (‘3'...
sun V " ‘- v‘“ \-
:l‘: i : -:‘P
\- , vudu ‘ “'

Pn:‘n:-:'\" "; F :
s..; u. v \. " v

-
.

"a“ :r: "2 :-
‘¥\75U\¥' "- “‘

weedings at six
wanted fields
Anaverage of a
cultivation. T
activities in t
seeds, it place

activities,

Harves
GAG is similar
fOl‘harvestinc

was estimated

 

 

63

Planting and nursing.--Seeds are either directly broadcast

 

in July or transplanted from drybed nurseryiriAugust and September.
Two varieties of seed are recommended for use in bafaros; a medium
duration (135-155 days) variety like 39k_5 to be planted on the outer
shallower edges of the fields and a long duration (155 to 175 days)

variety like Phar Com En to be planted on the deeper center. Where

 

transplanting occurs, seedlings are planted in single plants per
stand at distances of between 13 and 15 cm apart. Seedlings

are usually ten weeks old at the time of transplanting. The combined
)peration of planting and nursing required about 99 workdays per
iectare. The average seed rate was estimated at about 50 kilograms

ier hectare.

Care and cultivation.--Broadcasted fields need at least two

 

reedings at six and ten weeks after planting. Needing on trans-
rlanted fields is normally done about four weeks after transplanting.
,n average of about 63 workdays per hectare was needed for care and
ultivation. This was the third lowest when compared to similar
ctivities in the other ricxa enterprises and except for nursing of
eeds, it placed the lowest demand on labor in relation to the other

ctivities.

Harvesting.-—Harvesting is done by the single panicle method

 

d is similar to upland rice harvesting. The average labor demand
r harvesting was about 85 workdays per hectare. The average yield

5 estimated at about.1,828kilograms per hectare. This was higher

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

43.. 0'56 \{.'I:5f‘(
Liz” wt 1 v v-
:- A’P"“ a

f‘ “r; on. I

y .~‘, vu'v

is
.- A- 9‘ -
\4.3r't-' b ‘
v9» '\v5 bv U
U " ’-
. a .. .—
." i" ._ .. ._
L- »... v-

‘p‘ --A3~~‘o ..
F — \ b
\- s vvvkbM. ~»
'\ K‘ L‘-
1.! . "‘ ‘:
‘ ‘5 VG v.\.

s . ,
5"“1‘FNI‘:

‘r‘
'55» g, 3 c‘ \-
an.‘ “5:1 ‘,&.‘
“"V v.59. Cy" O
F: “fi‘aptb‘s‘l ,
T ‘V‘\- \vI:1 C
NTPAI'M
' "- ho

..

 

 

 

 

64

than the yields recorded for upland rice but was lower than those
of the other rice systems. The yields are also lower than the 1923
kilograms per hectare reported for inland swamps in Sierra Leone by

Spencer et al. (1979).

Mangrove Rice

 

This is rficme grown on brackish water marshes on areas which
are subject to salt water intrusions along the lower parts of the
river Gambia. Some of the soils contain acid sulphides and both the

Rhi20phora and Avicenia type of vegetation are present. The flooding

 

and tidal action provide moderate fertility from the silt deposits.
The potential area is estimated at 10,000 hectares.

Mangrove swamps are known to be very sensitive to prolonged
droughts for there is a risk that the sulphides in the soil might
change to sulphates which would induce a sudden fall in the pH down
to 4 or 5. This fall in pH, increases the acidity on the soil and
makes it impossible for rice to.be grown.

The average area of mangrove rice cultivated per dabada was
0.67 hectares. This is higher than any of the other rice enterprises
and is a reflection of the abundant supply of mangrove lands to
farmers living in the mangrove rice growing areas. Total labor demand
per hectare was estimated at 326 workdays. This was not substantially
different from the labor demands of irrigated rice. The family con-

tributed about 96 percent of the total labor, while the rest was

satisfied by hired labor.

 

 

.-
F
-A' A—( f \c.
— V'H
I‘- V--
p.
in" HR": .
inn 5--»9v

c'lo'gap. ~8"’P
I“ v-\ '
‘llfl-Ivuv
V
:r- _
-u v .
. 1““ {- 1'3"
s MS»: 1: y‘.
-
- Q
-— \§§- 2.-. h
- ‘- u— «-
“»; y u»
- I
".- ITF‘P \'..:¢;:‘.
5 ivl. 9“.

a ‘ .‘ u‘ ‘7‘—
' Y‘ t... ‘
ta us U. V

A .
:W-fi'rO A‘ 1:5.
u VU s, bl lg».

l0ri3555.nnicl

rEQuired per i

m
done by trans
planting is c
free 0f salt,
and at dlStaI
Usually be 0
0‘01? gm“ C
M are r
rate W58 est

thn 0f Dlar

 

65

Work on mangrove rice extended longer than any of the other
rice enterprises. Land preparation started in late May or early June
and harvesting did not finish until February. There were two peak
periods in September and January at the times of planting and harvest—
ing, respectively. Figure 3.3 depicts these labor peaks. The

highest monthly labor demand was in September.

Land_preparation.—-Because the soils are usually soft, minimum

 

tillage is required as a means of controlling weeds and as a means

of accelerating the desalinization process through the washing action
of rain water and river flooding. Thus, early digging is carried

out in May and June and sometimes extends up to July. The average
amount of labor used in land preparation was estimated at about 71
workdays,which was a little more than 21 percent of the total labor

required per hectare.

Planting and nursing.--All planting in mangrove swamps is

 

done by transplanting seedlings from a dry bed nursery. Most of the

planting is carried out in September when the top soils are generally
free of salt. Seedlings are transplanted in single plants per stand

and at distances of between five and seven inches. Seedlings should

usually be old enough to withstand any salinity effects and damage

from small crabs. Salt tolerant varieties such as Phar Com En and

 

SR 268 are recommended for mangrove conditions. The average seed
rate was estimated at 46 kilograms per hectare. The combined Opera-

tion of planting and nursing required about 112 workdays per hectare.

 

 

 

 

III-t luv:

‘ll"

Worl'tlny'.

rIgUFE 3. 3-J'10nt
Rice

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

66
80'
698
60-
521 5L9
388
c) 40 r 33.8
3 any
a
g 25a
L
G)
e- 20.
4 12a
to
U
“36‘ 7.5
3 (L3 17
a F M A M J a s o N 0

Months

ure 3.3—~Monthly Distribution of Labor per Hectare in Mangrove
,Rice Cultivation.

 

 

 

 

;
g
1

1

.
- O
:r“ ‘-\ '

bib "" ' ~

$
L'lE

-.*m-:+i“"§ ”7 ‘
U55495'V' V

 

have to be car

estimated at 1.

up to 2260 kil

Irrigated Rice

lrriga
Perimeters the
eight to ten '
Eastern half <

said to have l

 

67

Transplanting alone accounted for nearly 29 percent of the total

labor requirements per hectare.

Care and cultivation.--Before transplanting is carried out,
the land is thoroughly puddled and all weeds buried. Weeding is
done only on the outer edges of the fields where the soils are not
subject to prolonged flooding. Thus,total labor demand for care and

cultivation was only 43 workdays which was the lowest for similar

 

operations in the other rice enterprises.

Harvesting.--Harvesting is by the single panicle method

 

vith an average demand on labor of about 101 workdays. This was higher

:han the harvesting demands on any of the other rice enterprises.

 

'his is mainly due to the soft nature of the soil which makes mobil—
ty during harvesting very difficult and time consuming as harvesters
ave to be careful not to destroy the plants. Average yields were
stimated at1,880 kilograms per hectare. In Sierra Leone yields of
p to 2260 kilogram per hectare were reported by Spencer et al.

1979) for mangrove rice.

:rigated Rice

Irrigated rice is grown along the upper river banks in small
rimeters that are supplied with water from the river by means of
ght to ten inch pumps. Irrigated rice is concentrated on the
stern half of the country where a total of 2,500 to 3,000 hectares are

id to have been developed. The perimeters are capable of producing

 

 

 

 

r""< 1" 3
TH: Cur-v

estirazec‘ a: 1
for the wet se
tributed 84.8
tributed 6.2 i
distribution ‘
and 3.2 percei
season when 9

The rm
W the dry a1
distinct montl
September TOT“
lprn aCCount

 

68

two crops in a year--a rainy season crop lasting from the end of
June to early January and a dry season crop lasting from the beginning
of March to July.

The average area cultivated per dabada was 0.30 and 0.17
hectares for the wet and dry season crops, respectively. The higher
area in the wet season is probably due to the lower demand for irri-
gated perimeters during that season. Farmers usually prefer to
concentrate on groundnut production in the wet season. In the dry
season,when labor is free, there is an increased demand for the
limited irrigated perimeters, thus the plots are shared by a larger
number of farmers.

As can be seen in Table 4.1, the total labor demands were
estimated at 331 workdays for the dry season crop and 324 workdays
for the wet season crop. In the dry season crop family labor con-
tributed 84.8 percent of the labor while strange farmers con-
tributed 6.2 percent and hired labor contributed 9.0 percent. The
distribution in the wet season crop was 94.8 percent, 2.0 percent,
and 3.2 percent respectively. Hired labor is scarce in the wet
season when every adult is busy on his dabadals farms.

The monthly labor profiles are shown in Figures 3.4 and 3.5
for the dry and wet season creps, respectively. Both crops show a

distinct monthly peak period during the planting months of April and

September for the dry and wet crops, respectively. The month of

April accounted for about 31 percent of the total labor used in dry

season irrigated rice cultivation, whereas the month of September

 

~.-.~

K)

.4. ¢ -«.3

 

 

r. ”M
10 .. -
u.» 3i
.
.
. ~
.\v
LL
..u.
.L.
L

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

69
102.8
100*
80,
61.5 62.1

60' 55./
C.)
35 47.7
: 40f
(D
D.
V)
>,
'6’
'25
O
3 20f

0.1
JFMAMJJASOND
Months

figure 3.4--Monthly Distribution of Labor per Hectare in Dry Season
Rice Cultivation.

 

 

f

.b -l:|...|||ll I
«nu

. c
In»

.bl—-._ y.»——

’9.
cc; mactx;c3

fiiv
2

(IV

tigure 3.5 -

 

 

120 '

100 '

80 *

Workdays per Hectare

N
C

igure 3 5.--Monthly Distribution of Labor per Hectare in Wet Season

Ch
O

.5
C)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

70
129.5
54.4
39.1
35.1 '
28.]
15.0
10.0 '12.o
0.0.‘ 0.9
A l r-'_'
.1 F M A 04 J J A S 0 N D
Months

Rice Cultivation.

 

 

 

«rd
C u
..

.A -

a A u \

-rE brt‘ IVUu
’ l

-P‘ ’fi'.~~;-;'

_ v: --»
'~

.5 an:
ilVGI}
Plan

WEE bed nurs
ing, IranSp
Seedlings ar
inches apart
requ‘l‘Ed abc
for the wet

than 94 PEFC
mated at 77

kilograms pg
about two t‘

entel‘Dl‘ises

 

71

accounted for about 40 percent of the total labor used in wet

season irrigated rice cultivation.

Land preparation.——The land is usually cleared soon after
the previous crop has been harvested and removed from the fields.
The perimeters are then flooded with water to soften the soil for
power tilling. Farmers pay an average of D37.07 per hectare for
this operation. Levelling and puddling after plowing is done

manually by the farmers. 0n the average, power tillers used about

24.0 hours and 27.0 hours for plowing the dry and wet season crops.
respectively. Labor input for levelling and puddling was estimated

at 37.5 and 49.1 workdays for the dry and wet season crops, respec-

tively.

Planting and nursing.--All seedlings are transplanted from
wet bed nurseries when still very young to allow for maximum tiller-
ing. Transplanted seedlings are usually about three weeks old.
Seedlings are planted in rows at about six per stand and six
inches apart. The combined operations of planting and nursing

required about 104 workdays for the dry season crop and 136 workdays

for the wet season crop. In both cases planting accounted for more

than 94 percent of that labor. 0n the average seed rates were esti-
mated at 77 kilograms per hectare for the dry season crop and 95
kilograms per hectare for the wet season crop. These rates are

about two times higher than the seed rates used in the other rice

enterprises.

 

72

Care and cultivation.--Water is pumped periodically into
the fields from a central pumping station. Individual farmers control
the amount of water entering their plots by closing or opening slots
that are located along the water channels. Farmers pay a fixed
amount of D247.00/hectare per crop for water. It is estimated that
the dry season crop requires two times as much water pumping as does
the wet season crOp. Two weedings are required at about four and
eight weeks after transplanting. Three fertilizer applications at
transplanting, tillering, and panicle formation at the rate of 40
kilograms of phosphate and 110 kilograms of nitrogen are recommended.
These are substantially higher than the observed rates of about 14
and 25kilograms per hectare for the dry and wet season crops,
respectively.

Average labor demand for care and cultivation was estimated
at about 100 workdays and 49 workdays for the dry and wet crops,
respectively. The large difference in these two labor demands is
hard to eXplain, except that the wet season crop had a higher labor
input in land preparation and planting. Both activities help to
kill weeds through trampling by feet and so could have reduced the
weeding problem. Also competition for labor from the other upland

:rops might have drastically reduced the amount of time devoted to

veeding the wet season irrigated crop.

Harvesting.——Irrigated rice is harvested when mature, but

 

;till very wet. Harvesting is done with the use of a sickle. Bundles

if stalks of rice are cut at near ground level and the harvested

 

 

73

crop is left in the fields either in the form of tied sheaves or
loose. Sometimes the harvested crop is taken home immediately for
threshing or it is left in the field for storage. Field storage can
last from one to fourteen days.

Labor demand for harvesting averaged about 90 workdays for
each crop. The average yields were recorded at 2,767 kilograms and
2,429 kilograms per hectare for the dry and wet crops, respectively.

To summarize, Table 3.2 has been provided to show the monthly
and activity labor profile relationships between the various systems
of rice production. Except for dry season irrigated rice cultivation,
the highest demand for labor occurred either in August or September
which corresponded with the planting activity. In the dry season crop,
the month of April had the highest demand on labor and also corre-
sponded with the planting activity. On the activity section, however,
it is only in irrigated rice that planting tended to have a higher
labor demand than the other activities. Instead, care and cultiva-
tion demanded more labor in upland rice cultivation; land preparation
I”.Eéf§£9 and harvesting in mangrove rice. It is difficult to draw
any conclusions or make statements establishing a pattern of rela—
tionships between activity labor demand and monthly labor peak
periods. For as Cleave (1974) points out, when labor profiles are
compiled in calendar months, critical peaks of short duration may
not show up in the data because the labor time is Spead over a month

or an extended peak may not be apparent because it is divided between

nonths.

 

 

74

 

 

.mcowumP>mn nemesmpm one mommgucmgma cw mmcamwdo

mama Am>g=m "moczom

 

AV.VNNV H.¢~m Amo.~mNV o.Hmm

Ame.~HHV o.o~m

 

 

 

 

Aav.mmmV s.~mm Amm.maHV m.mm~ a;\asaexcoz cones sawswuuq _auop
A¢N.me m.om Aa~.a~V ~.am Amm.emV m.ooH Aoo.mm V c.4m th.mx V w.mm a;\msauxcoz mcwumascax
Aom.flwV ~.me Ame.moV w.aa Amm.mmV a.~e Amfi.om V m.~o Afim.mm V a.mm a;\m2eexeoz cospmswp_=u new atau
A-.~oHV «.mms Aom.e~V “.ma “am.a¢V m.¢a Am~.Ho~V m.mm --- a;\msmextoz a:_u=apa
Awm.o~V H.me AQN.mNHV m.~m ANN.meV m.o~ Ama.ax V m.m- AmH.¢N V ~.o~ m;\msae¥coz cowaacaaata aces
Voo.eHV 4.x AmH.oHV m.¢ “N4.~HV ~.nH Amfi.o V m.¢ --- a;\asaexcoz seamtsz
masussspaa
AH.¢x~V ~.¢~m Amo.~m~V o.Hmm Ams.HflHV o.m~m Aa¢.mm~V fi.~mm Amm.masV w.mm~ m;\asaexcoz Loans spzucoz pauoc
fia~.moV 4.4m --- Vo~.¢~V w.~H Aom.meV m.eo AeH.aH V m.- a;\msauxzoz taaeauao
Ax~.~oV ~.am --- Amm.o~V m.“ Amm.e~V N.H~ Amm.~o V m.Hk m;\msaa¥coz Lassasoz
Amm.~mV H.m~ --- AaN.H¢V a.Hm Amm.VHV o.m~ Aom.kfi V 8.x a;\m»ouxcoz cascade
Aa~.HoHV m.a~s --- Aoa.oNV m.am Aem.HaV e.mm Awa.mm V a.m~ ~;\msauxcoz cassaoaam
Ham.mmV H.mm --- Amm.~NV m.mm Amfi.m¢V 5.xx Amo.~m V m.m~ m;\msaexcoz pmsmsq
ANN.NmV o.- Am~.mkV ~.~e Amw.mHV 5.0m Ace.HeV m.oo Aom.ue V ~.~m a;\msmcxzoz span
Am~.mHV o.mfi Ame.onV H.Nm Ame.omV m.mN Ams.an 5.04 Am¢.om V m.m~ a;\m»aextoz acne
afiw.~V a.o Amm.mmV m.Hm nem.m V n.m Aoo.oHV H.e Amo.m V m.o a;\m»aexcoz sax
--- AHN.aoV m.~o~ Am.~ V m.o --- --- a;\msaexzoz _aca<
in- Aam.wNV n.mm in- -i- ii: m;\mxmcxco3 :ucmz
afim.o V 0.0 Awm.o V H.o afia.neV m.wm Aom.o V m.o --- m;\mzmuxcoz xemzcnwu
“ma.~mV o.oH --- Amm.mmV V.~m Amo.NNV m.om oflma.nm V a.oH m;\wsaeucoz scascaq
as
am: zgo
muwm m>ocm=mz ogmmmm muwm uccpa: pwcz EmpH
mon vmpmmmch

 

5.52,:an 8.5. E 359:. LBS 32.52 2; 355: to raising 59:

 

 

75

The high standard deviations, relative to the mean averages,
are due to the existence of considerable differences among farmers
in their deployment of labor. Resources available on farms and
farmers' preferences in crop combinations vary. This is especially
true when aggregations are made from different villages as in the

case with the figures in Table 3.2.

Post-Harvest Activities

 

Threshing

 

Threshing of irrigated rice is usually done after a whole
field has been harvested. Bundles of rice are beaten against forty-
four gallon empty drums so that the grains fall off. Bundles of
traditionally short-cut panicles are often stored in the village
at home and threshed only when ready for consumption. Threshing is
done with the use of mortar and pestle and only small quantities

are threshed at a time.

Winnowing

 

The most common traditional way of winnowing is to toss the
grains up in the air from a bowl-like round or oval tray, usually
made from bamboo. The wind carries away the husk and other light
materials. Another method is by tilting the container, containing
the paddy so that the grain flows out of it freely. Again the wind

separates the chaff from the grain.

 

 

 

 

 

76

9:21:19

Short cut bundles of panicles are exposed to drying on the
day of harvest, but actual slow drying takes place in the village
store rooms. In Kuntaur, where The Gambia Produce Marketing Board
(GPMB) owned rice mill is located, hot air drying of paddy is carried
out. There are two separate units. One is used to dry a stack of
wet paddy in bags and the other is used as a heat and air source
for in-bin drying of paddy in three round outdoor silos of about 80
tons capacity each. Irrigated rice that is threshed in the fields

is usually dried on flat surfaces under direct sunlight.

Milling

Small village milling machines are almost nonexistent in the
rural areas. There was one small mill Operating in Jarreng. Almost
all village milling is by hand using a mortar and a pestle. The rice

mill in Kuntaur handles mostly rice purchased by GPMB. It is said

  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  

to be operating at below 50 percent capacity.

Rice Irrigation Projects in The Gambia

 

Since pre-independence times, The Gambia has devoted a sub-
stantial amount of scarce resources to the development of irrigated
rice cultivation. The droughts of the 19703 reinforced the belief
that irrigated agriculture was the only solution to the uncertain-
ties inherent in the weather and provided further justifications for
assive and ambitious investment plans in irrigated agriculture.
his section provides a brief description of some of these investment

rojects.

 

 

 

 

77

The Jakhally and Patcharr Swamps

 

The scheme was implemented between 1950 and 1956 by the then
Commonwealth Development Corporation and covered some 1,173 hectares
of land. It has been described as the largest hydro—agricultural
development project in The Gambia and was located about 18 kilo-
meters downstream from Georgetown.

The operation of this scheme was a failure because of the
inadequacy of the basic studies in hydrology and topography, con-
straints associated with labor force availability and the relatively
low producer prices at the time. Deficiencies in the drainage
system were the main technical defect. The development comprised of
a suction valve on the Jakhally Bolon, a pumping station at Sapu,
and an earth-made canal that was more than three kilometers long.
These swamps have been cultivated under rainfed conditions since the
project was abandoned in 1956.

In 1977, The Gambian government decided to rehabilitate this
scheme. A feasibility study was carried out in 1977/78 that covered
about 1,190 hectares in Patcharr and 1,451 hectares in Patchen.

nder the second five-year development plan, it is envisaged that
00 hectares will be developed for irrigation by pumping and 1,000
ectares of swamp land will be improved in this area. The project
'5 to serve as a pilot program and model in riverine swamp develop-
ent, irrigation method testing, and irrigation method evaluation
or the much larger future swamp development program to be under-

aken following the construction of the anti-salt water intrusion

 

 

 

78

bridge-barrage on the river in Yelitenda. The project is expected

to benefit 15,000 people in 14 villages.

The Taiwan Mission Prgject

 

Between 1966 and 1974 a Cooperative mission from Taiwan selected
a number of sites along the river in the McCarthy Island and Upper
River Divisions. Each site had a minimum cultivable surface area of
four hectares and was divided into 10 to 20 allotments per hectare.
Water was pumped from the river and flowed from field to field by gravity.

The scheme developed about 607 hectares introduced new rice
varieties and organized growers into cooperatives through which inputs
were channeled. All inputs, except labor, were supplied free in the
first year. Inputs for subsequent cropping was to be purchased by farm-
ers. The scheme was not able to produce two crops per year because of
the farmers' lack of familiarity with machines and the strict water
management practices. It was terminated eight years later because of

changes in The Gambia's foreign relations with Taiwan.

A ricultural Rice Development Project
Encouraged by the Taiwanese initiative, The Gambian government

reaffirmed its commitment to pursuing a policy of rice self-sufficiency.

 

rom 1973 to 1976 the International Bank for Reconstruction and Devel-
pment and the International Development Association financed a $3.7
about 0 6.7m) program whose initial objective was the development of
,200 hectares of irrigated land in the McCarthy Island Division.

n practice, only 580 hectares were developed. The project was

 

 

 

79

developed along the lines of the Taiwanese initiative with a slight
modification in terms of introducing a credit component into the
system. The irrigation infrastructure was costed against the coop-
erative societies and production inputs were extended on a credit
basis to farmers.

The scheme was terminated in 1976 leaving behind a huge amount
of unpaid debts. Poor and inadequate financial estimates, ineffi-
cient canal construction and poor management have been mentioned

as reasons for the failure of this project.

The Agro-Chinese Project

 

In 1975 a bilateral aid program with the People's Republic of
China was signed and a Chinese mission arrived in The Gambia in 1976.
Its objectives were to develop 1,200 hectares of irrigated land,
consolidate an existing 1,800 hectares, and develop a pilot scheme to
improve the Patcharr swamps. The project fulfilled its basic objec-
tives of reclaiming 1,200 hectares of land, increased the mechanical
stock of pumps, power tillers and threshers, and introduced motorized
threshers, transplanters and four-wheel drive small tractors. The
project also made an impact on local mechanical skills by offering
on-the-job training for local mechanics and assisting in the train-
ing of local blacksmiths. Since the Chinese experts left in 1980,
however, most of the mechanical equipment have broken down beyond

repair.

fgture Plans for Irrigated Rice
The greatest threat to the development of irrigated rice in

The Gambia is posed by the annual intrusion, upstream, of the salt

 

 

 

 

 

80

tongue. Salinity rises upstream at the pace of about 15 to 20

kilometers per month in the dry season. This rate is accelerated

in years of poor rainfall. In 1978, the salt tongue is said to have

penetrated as far as Kuntaur, 256 kilometers from Banjul. Other

measurements indicate that the process is intensified by the with-

drawal of water for irrigation purposes. It is estimated that each

cubic meter of water drawn for irrigation will increase the speed

at which salt water enters the river by one kilometer per month.

At this rate the withdrawal of 10 million cubic meters of water per

second during three months for irrigation of 5,000 hectares of rice

fields could bring the salt tongue close to Georgetown, 280 kilometers

from the mouth of the river (Peter et al., 1979). This would

prevent the development of irrigation in the McCarthy Island Division.
Thus, hopes of any full-scale development of irrigated rice

Ilie on the construction of the anti-salt dam-bridge in Yelitenda at

[the existing ferry crossing on the Koalak-Farafenni-Zinquinchor

road. The dam is expected to perform three basic functions. It will

store fresh water originating from the upper and middle basin,

control rising salt water, and allow a passage way for the transgambia

road. The dam will also allow approximately 24,000 hectares of rice

to be irrigated in double cropping. The estimated cost of the dam

in 1978 prices was D 138 million. It is expected that construction

of the dam will commence at the end of the second five-year plan.

The development of 24,000 hectares of irrigated rice is then expected

:0 be completed in the year 2000.

 

 

I___

 

 

 

81

Although technical studies have established the feasibility
of the dam, both social, economic, and environmental impact analysis
have yet to lend credence to its construction. In addition, expe-
riences in other countries have shown that large-scale irrigation
projects such as that envisaged after the construction of the dam are
often unprofitable and inefficient. A number of lessons could be
drawn from the mistakes and problems that plagued the past small-scale
irrigation projects. First, there has been a lack of adequate and
sound technical, social, economic, and environmental studies which
are all necessary for determining the feasibility of a project. The
farmers' perceptions, preferences, and priorities are often assumed
away when irrigation projects are implemented in The Gambia. Jennie
Dey (1982) addressed herself to this problem in a paper entitled,
"Development Planning in The Gambia: The Gap between Planners'
and Farmers' perceptions, expectations, and Objectives."

Second, both farmers and extension workers have been intro-
duced to alien techniques of rice cultivation with no rigorous and
determined efforts to provide them with adequate training before
and during the implementation of the projects. The result is that
projects have had to be terminated shortly after the departure of
the expatriate technicians. Third, most of the projects' failures
can be attributed to financial and technical mismanagement. If
future irrigation projects are to achieve any amount of success, a

concerted effort has to be made to study the causes of failure of

 

 

 

 

82

the past projects with a view to minimizing their occurrences in

succeeding projects.

Rice Marketing and Pricing Policy

 

Marketing

 

In addition to holding a monOpoly for the import of rice,
The Gambia Produce Marketing Board (GPMB) also participates in the
collection of locally produced rice. Figure 3.6 depicts the market-
ing channels for rice in The Gambia. Imported rice is sold to whole-
salers, such as the National Trading Company (NTC) who, in turn, can
sell either to small traders, retailers, or directly to consumers at
wholesale prices. Marketing margins at each level of transaction

are controlled.

 

Locally produced rice is purchased by the(fldhs,through the
Cooperatives, who pay the guaranteed producer price to farmers.
Because of the low price offered by the cooperatives, farmers have
often preferred to sell any marketable surplus to small traders or
directly to the consumer, who pays above the official producer price.
GPMB's purchases of locally produced rice have averaged less than
2,000 tons, representing less than 10 percent of the total produc-
tion, in the past ten years. There is, however, no incentive on the
part of GPMB to participate actively in the marketing of locally
produced rice because of the high processing cost. Paddy purchased

from farmers by the Cooperatives is first conveyed to Kuntaur for

 

milling before being transported to Banjul. Both the locally produced

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

83
Producer émggrted
\ .
\ :
I
I
I
1
.0
COOperative -% GPMB
1
Small *____-_.u__ Wholesaler ,.”
Trader NTC l//
. '7
t I
; i
I I
I I
I I
t a
\i 9 I
3 Key
; Retailer : ....... Imported Rico”
I
‘ I Domestic Rice
I
I I
a l
I
. I
i l
I
v VA 1
> I
V_; Consumer "“

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 3.6--Rice Marketing Channels.

 

 

 

 

84

rice and the imported rice are sold at the same price despite the

fact that the locally produced rice is often of better quality.

Pricing Policy

 

The Gambian government's pricing policy for cereals is
passive at best. There is no coarse grain pricing policy and it
is unknown to what extent there exists an informal market. However,
it is known that a high percentage of the cereal production is auto-
consumed. Only rice among the local cereals has any resemblance
of a pricing policy. The price for rice, however, is so unattrac-
tive that only a small percentage is offered for sale to GPMB. It
has been suggested that a key constraint to food production in The
Gambia is the absence of a formal official marketing structure for
locally produced cereals. This had led to the lack of a readily per-
ceived demand for farmers to produce in excess of their subsistence
needs (A10, 1979).

Both producer and consumer prices in The Gambia are effec-
tively controlled. In setting and controlling these prices, the
government has a dual policy objective. It wants to provide ade-

uate incentives for increasing food production and it also seeks
0 protect the interest of the consumers at the same time. These
wo objectives are at variance and in practice the objective of
nsuring an adequate supply of rice at reasonable prices for con-
umers has tended to dominate. For example, before 1977, imported

ice was being subsidized by selling it below the cost of importation.

n addition, producer prices have always been set below market

 

 

 

85

clearing levels. The immediate effect of this policy has been to
stimulate rice consumption at the expense of substitutable cereals.
Thus, relative price changes which could have been favorable to
domestic traditional staples were checked and preferences for rice
reinforced.

Because producer prices are lower than the retail market
price, the official producer price has only been partially effective,
since producers have been able to sell directly at the higher retail
prices. This minimizes the direct price effects on production, but
there is little doubt that the policy of setting low official
producer prices has a negative effect on farmers' incentives to
produce and‘to sell. Official producer prices offered by GPMB
increased by an average of nearly 28 percent annually from D 134.40
per ton of paddy in 1971/72 to 0 510.00 per ton in 1981/82.2 Despite
these apparent increases in prices, domestic production actually
declined for this period. This is probably because farmers have
either not interpreted these price increases as a permanent correction
of the pattern of incentives or real and relative prices are still not
iigh enough to induce farmers to increase their resources in rice

farming and thus increase production.

Production Practices on Upland Crops

 

Before proceeding to a discussion of the gender division of

abor, it is informative to first decribe the production practices

 

2Assuming a 66 percent milling recovery rate, these figures
ranslate to 0 203.60 and D 727.70 per ton of milled rice, respectively.
he controlled consumer price of milled rice in 1981/82 was nearly
790.00 per ton.

 

 

 

86

on upland crops. Almost all Gambian farmers depend entirely on the
production of groundnut for cash income. Although cotton was intro-
duced as an alternative crop, very few farmers are involved in its
cultivation. Only four farmers in this study cultivated cotton. It
is, therefore, not included in this description.3 Maize, sorghum,
early (sgnp) and late (sanyg) millet are grown as supplementary

cereals for home consumption. Findo (digitaria) used to be an upland

 

cereal cultivated by women, but it has gradually been replaced by
other cereals. Only one farmer in this sample cultivated findo for
the period of the survey. Table 3.3 is a summary of the major
input/output coefficients for groundnut and the four major upland

cereals.

Groundnuts

 

Groundnut was introduced in The Gambia by European travelers
lin the early eighteenth century. Since then it has served as the
backbone of The Gambian economy. The average area cultivated per
dabada was 0.92 hectares. This was the largest hectarage devoted
to any single crop emphasizing the importance attached to that crop.

The total labor input per hectare was estimated at about 119
workdays. This is almost equal to the labor demands of the other
upland crops with the exception of sorghum which has less labor. Of
this total labor input, about 91 percent was provided by the family,

:5 percent was provided by strange farmers and the rest was satisfied

I;

3See Appendix A for a similar Tables on cotton.

 

 

.mmmu comm cw LmNm—wucmw vmw_aam uposwmzo; wco mpcom

V .w~_me mo was“ ow szcm we cu
, amazmmm mam m_mmcmo cmcpo mo mmomca .commmm Nm\HmmH as» cw oNVms use ascucsocm cow mmuwca cmuzooca umoacmcmawu
_ .Nmmfi an: at mmma_ma o~.N u oo.Hmu
_ .mmcm name any do mcowumw>mc vcmucmpm ozu cwcuwz Pram aoco cm>vm a so mwcm cmpm>wupso among mupocmmao; mmuspucun

.mcowumm>wv ucmccmpm use mmmwzacmcmq cw mmcamwum

V .mumo Am>csm "wugaom

 

 

 

 

a¢.o ae.o aa.o m¢.o om.o m¥\omsmaPao epsauso to aorta auamsama
mm.~ om.N ow.~ mo.m co.m u3\omwmmpmo mama mam: wmwcacmucm
AmH.oV om.o flam.oV No.0 Aom.oV mm.o Aas.oV mN.o Vow.oV Na.o a: mate amacasa
7, as am mm mm ma AaaamaaV ma_o;am=o: to .02
no mung chwcwo
mm Hm Hm mm mm m;\m;=o: wcmEnwzam czmcuuxo
mm Hm HN mm mm m;\mc=o: cmzoa Foewc<
4.” m.H ~.N o.a N.m a;\msmaxcoz aacwz
N.“ w.m o.oH m.m <.m m;\mamcxcoz mcmELmd mmcmcum
o.oHH N.~HH m.m~ e.ooH m.mo~ a;\msaexcoz sfiasmu cows: co
Amm.mHfiV m.o- Ama.m¢HV m.hdfi o.Ha N.QHH m.mHH a;\mzaaxcoz cones Peace
--- mm mm mm mm m;\mmx cmNVPPucwa
Axo.mm V mm Amo.m V NH Amfi.as V 4N Amo.om V mm AmN.aN V mm a;\max abacaaam
Amo.mmNV Ham “em.esmV Nmm Ava.moeV «mm “as.smmV mfiod mfiao.mmmV NVNV a;\max apaa>
pmmwmmmMWMV uwpmmuzmwcam Eagmcom memz pscvcsoco awe: swam

 

Macao eempaa co “boo usap=0\p=acV to sam523m--.m.m msmac

 

 

88

by hired labor. The monthly labor profile shown in Figure 3.7

shows two monthly labor peaks in August and November. These are the
months of intense weeding and uprooting of groundnuts respectively
The two months account for a little more than 44 percent of the
total labor utilized.

Slashing and burning of groundnut fields started in the later
part of May and continued up to the end of June. As soon as the
first heavy rain falls, farmers construct ridges (if possible) to
get ready for planting. Some of the farmers prefer to plant on flat
ground as it makes weeding with the use of ox—drawn equipment easier.
0n the average, land preparation required about 13 workdays per
hectare.

Planting is carried out as soon as the second heavy rains
fall in July. The rainfall must be heavy enough to soak at least
eight inches of the top soil. The main variety grown is the Senegal
(Bgmbay) 28/206, on upright growing variety which lends itself to
weeding by animal-drawn equipment. Where ridges are not constructed,
planting is usually done on flatcntnuwiwithout initial plowing with
the help of ox-drawn equipment. Planting on ridges is done by hand.
The average seed rate was 83 kilograms per hectare and planting demand
on labor was estimated at about 8 workdays per hectare.

Care and cultivation, a combined operation of weeding and
hoeing is done about two to three weeks after planting for those who
planted on flat ground. The other care and cultivation activity,

a combined operationcfiiweeding and earthing up is done before the

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

89
40
26.1 26.6
E
.23
g 20.
I 17.2 -
a 14.1
(.1-
53. 12.2
8
a: 8.3
g 70
1....
2 5 {L64
'" 0.2 0.0

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

J F M A M J J A S 0 01 0

Months

Ire 3.7-~Monthly Distribution of Labor per Hectare in Groundnut
Cultivation.

 

 

90

plants flower. Fertilizer (if any) was applied at time of planting
and before the plants flowered at an average rate of 28 kilograms
per hectare. Most farmers use animal manure to fertilize their
fields by asking cattle owners to tether their cattle on the groundnut
field overnight ikn* about a week. This is usually done in the months
of March, April, and May. Care and cultivation had the highest
demand on labor of about 51 workdays when compared to the other
Operations. The combined operation of planting and weeding used, on
the average, about 38 hours of animal and ox-drawn equipment.
Harvesting started at the end of the rains in November, when
the soil was still soft to make uprooting easier. When the groundnut
is uprooted, it is left in the fields to dry until ready for thresh—
ing. Threshing is done by beating the nuts»on-straw with a stick.
This mechanism separates the nuts from the straw. The groundnut is
then winnowed by a mechanism similar to that used in winnowing rice
and bagged before being taken home to await the marketing season.
About 39 percent of the total labor was used in harvesting, thresh-
ing, and on-the—field winnowing. The average yield was estimated

at14717 kgs per hectare.

Maize
Maize is usually grown in back yards near dwelling houses
here the soil can be fertilized by household refuse and animal
anure. It is usually the first grain to be grown. The average
ousehold area devoted to maize was about 0.23 hectares and is the

owest among the other upland cereals. The total labor requirements

 

 

 

 

 

 

91

per hectare were estimated at about 116 workdays with the family
contributing a little more than 91 percent of that labor. Strange
farmers and hired labor contributed about 5 percent and 4 percent,
respectively. The monthly labor profile is depicted in Figure 3.8.
The month of July had duehighest monthly demand on labor and this was
followed by the month of October. These are the periods of intense
care and cultivation and harvesting, respectively.

Land brushing and clearing starts in late May before the
rains begin. Planting is done on ridges or on flat, unplowed soil.
The average seed rate was estimated at about 33 kilograms per hectare.
Care and cultivation placed the greatest demand on labor and more than
40 percent of the total labor was devoted to this activity alone.
Two weedings (if planting is done on flat ground) and one weeding (if
planting is done on ridges) are normally required. The last weeding
is combined with earthing up. Fertilizer was applied at the average
rate of 2 kilograms per hectare. Only one farmer applied fertilizer.

The crop is sometimes harvested and used as vegetables when
the ears are still very fresh. But most of the crop is harvested
when dry. In this form it can be stored for longer periods of time
and used for regular meals in the form of 909232. The average yield

was estimated at 1,103 kilograms of dry grain.

Sorghum

Sorghum is sometimes grown in a mixture with groundnut, but
in recent times such mixtures have become less common. They are,

therefore, not considered in this study. Where such mixtures occur,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

92
45
40.4
4oi ”'1
23.6
19.4
9) 20.
6
g 15'1 13.7
a
C).
2,
-8
E
T‘ 01 3.3 1.2
. Vag=a '
JFM MJJASOND

Months

re 3.8-~Monthly Distribution of Labor per Hectare in Maize

Cultivation.

 

 

 

 

93

however, they are usually planted in ratios of 15 to 20 rows of
groundnuts to one row of sorghum. Higher ratios in favor of sorghum
would usually reduce the yield of groundnut because of the shading
effect of the sorghum plant. The more common practice is to plant
sorghum as a sole crop.

Sorghum'ksbelieved to grow very well in less fertile soils
that would normally be left for fallow. The average area devoted
to sorghum per household was 0.39 hectares. The total labor require-
ments was on the average about 91 workdays per hectare. This makes
it the lowest total labor demand per hectare for all the upland crops
considered in this study. Family labor contributed a little more
than 86 percent of this labor, strange farmers about 11 percent, and
hired labor less than13percent. The monthly labor profile in Figure
3.9 shows that July had the highest monthly labor demand, followed
by August. These are the months of intense weeding.

Land preparation starts in late May and continues up to the
middle of June. Planting is mostly done on flat ground at an esti—
mated seed rate of 24 kilograms per hectare. Hoeing and initial
weeding is done in July with the aid of ox-drawn equipment- A
second weeding and earthing up is done in August. Care and cultiva-
tion used a little more than 51 percent of the total labor and
required on the average about 21 hours of animal and ox-drawn equip-
ment . On the average, chemical fertilizer was applied at the rate
of 2 kilograms per hectare (only one household applied fertilizer).

Harvesting is done in October and November. The plants are

felled so that the panicles can be easily cut with a small knife.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

94
40t
29.8
I‘—
23.8
cu
S.
FD
1320,
33
_ 15.0
s. . .
a l—
g 10.2
r6
3 58
—§ __. 4.5
'"l
1.1 0.8
1 I 1—1
J F M A M J J A S 0 N 0

Months

igure 3 9—-Monthly Distribution of Labor per Hectare in Sorghum

Cultivation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

95

The short cut panicles are taken home at the end of a harvesting day
and stored on roof tops or ceilings until ready for consumption.
Threshing is done with the use of a mortar and pestle. The grains
are ground to form a local diet called fggtg. The average dry grain
yield was estimated at 884 kilograms per hectare.

Early_(suno) and Late (Sanyo)
Millet

 

The major difference between early and late millet is that
if planted at the same time early millet matures about four to six
weeks earlier than late millet. Otherwise, they have similar cul-
tural practices. The average areas devoted to early and late millet
was 0.62 hectares and 0.30 hectares per household cultivating these
crops, respectively. Early millet had the highest average area
among the upland cereals.

Total labor per hectare engaged in these two cr0ps was esti-
mated at about 118 workdays and 121 workdays for early and late
millet, respectively. These labor inputs are unexpectedly high.
This is due to the very high labor demands in care and cultivation
which account for more than 57 percent of the total labor demand in
each of the crops. Although it was impossible to separate the labor
inputs per activity in greater details, it is suspected that bird
scaring accounted for a substantial amount of the labor in care and
cultivation. This suspicion is clearly confirmed in the monthly
labor profile for early millet in Figure 3.10, which shows a peak

monthly labor demand in September, just before the harvest in October.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

96
47.4
401
g 19.6
3 20, 18.6
m .
I
‘2 13.3.1
,g 4032
:5 6.3
- 1.4
0.1 , 0.9
. . r—-1 1"”3
J}: M A M J 1 A s o N 0

Months

Figure 3.IO——Monthly Distribution of Labor per Hectare in Early(§882)
Millet Cultivation.

 

 

97

This is not very apparent in Figure 3.11, although the ratio of the
labor inputs in the month of October to the harvest month of November
is still relatively high.

Cultivation of early millet extends from May to October while
that of late millet extends from May to November. Both crops are used
to make jggtg and have similar cultural practices to that of sorghum.
Estimated average yields were 827 kilograms and 961 kilograms of
dry grain for early and late millet, respectively.

Table 3.4 helps to summarize the monthly and activity labor
inputs for each of the five upland crops considered. It is similar
to the summary for the rice enterprises presented in Table 3.2. Three
crops-—maize, sorghum, and late millet--had the highest monthly labor
demand in July. The highest monthly labor demands for groundnut and
early millet were in November and September, respectively. Care and

cultivation had the highest activity labor demand in all crops.

Marketing and Pricing Policy for Groundnut

 

Marketing

 

 

 

The Gambia Produce Marketing Board (GPMB) holds a monopoly in
the purchaseiand export of groundnut. To purchase groundnut from the
producers, GPMB depends heavily on Licensed Buying Agents (LBA's)
and the Cooperatives. Purchased groundnut is transported either to
Banjul or Kaur where crushing mills are located. The nuts are
exported in the raw form (decorticated) or in the form of oil (milled).
All transport of groundnut products out of The Gambia is handled by

The Gambia Produce Marketing Company Ltd., a subsidiary of GPMB. A

 

 

98

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

l
40’
29.8
2
I'D
+31, 22.2
:- 20 18./
2’, 17.3
m 15.7
>7
”0
'0
if Nb
3 .
4.3
1.2
_. - I

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Months

Figure 3.11--Monthly Disribution of Labor per Hectare in Late(

. san
Millet Cultivation. YO)

 

 

 

 

 

$39

 

 

 

 

 

.mcomum.>oc ugmucwam mam momogucmgoa c. mwcauwum

 

 

 

.m...: a...

open zm>c=m ”mucsom
.NN.N..V 8.0N. .ma.oa.V m.... ..N..mV o... .....NV N.m.. ....NaV a.m.. a..maae..oz Lo... ...s..o< ...o.
.m..a.V a.N. .N..NNV 8.8N .NN.NNV ...N ....NNV ..om ..N.oa.V a... a..m»au..og ac..mo>.a=
..a.oaV ..N. .No.mN.V N... .Nm..mV m... .mN.o¢V a... .MN.N.NV N... a;.asaa..oz co..a>...so age a...
.N..N.V a.N. ....m V ... ......V a... .m..N.V m.N. .oa.omV o.m a;\m.~a.goz a:..=a..
.am..NV ..NN .Nm.N.V o... .o..¢.V N... .aN.NNV ..ON .N..o¢V N.m. m.\msaa..oz co..agaaaga new.
mo...>..o<
.NN.N..V 0.0N. .mm.me.V N.... ..N..aV o..a ....mNV N.m.. ....NmV m.m.. .....maxcoz to... ».;.=oz .a.o.
.am.m V N.. ....N V a.o .Nm.m V m.o --- .oN.omV .... a;\msaa..oz Laneoooa
..m.mmV ..N. ......V 4.. .No.m.V ... .NN.o V N.. .mN.¢m.V o.oN a;\msaax.oz Lonso>oz
.ae.mNV N... .NN.mNV o.m. ..N.NNV o... .NN.oNV ..NN ....N.V 0.. a..m.~a..oz toaoaoo
.N...NV m... .oo..mV a... ......V N.m .....NV 4... .m..N.V N.N. a.\m.me..oz topso.aom
.NG.NNV N.NN .om.m.V N.o. ..N.a¢V m.MN .NN..NV ..m. .Ne.aONV ...N a..m.ma..oz .mamsa
.mm.aNV N.aN .mo.NNV o... .NN.NNV m.mN .om..mV v.0. .om.maV N... m.\msaaxgoz ..aw
.eo.NNV .... ....N.V ..m. ..N...V N.c. ..N..NV ..m. .om.oaV m.N a;\m.aa.coz was.
.NN.. V m.e ......V N.o ..a.m V ... .ma..V N.N .m..mV ... a;\m.aa..03 ma:
.1 a- 1- -1 1-- mc\m>ovxgoz ..caq
-- .NN.oV ..o -- .N..oV ..o .o..oV 0.0 a.\msaa.coz cogmz
-- -- -- -- .om..V m.o a;\msaa.toz stmagao.
-- -- -- -- ......V m.N a;\m.aa..oz .gascma
mmmmgm
amwmme pN.Mwmmm~cam Ezgmcom oN.mz muscucaocu “we: Emu.

 

maocu weapon c. mwpwmoca Loam. Auw>wpu< new x.;.coz mo xumsE=mii.a.m w.m<.

 

 

 

 

100

London based office negotiates the sale of groundnuts, mostly to
EEC countries.

Producers are free to choose which LBA to sell to, but only
members can sell to the cooperatives. Figure 3.12 shows the channels
through which the groundnuts pass from the producer to the London
office. LBA's utilize licensed traders who make direct purchase
from the farmers. Both licensed traders and the cooperatives pay the
guaranteed producer prices. The GPMB then purchase all groundnut
collected by the LBAUs andcooperatives. Based on relative profits
on the world market, a decision is made on how much raw product and
processed product is to be exported.

Generally, purchased groundnut is transported to Produce
Depots, located on strategic positions along the river, by the buying
agents. From here transportation to Kaur or Banjul is done by the
Gambia River Transport Company, another subsidiary of GPMB. It
should be noted that some of the groundnut purchased by the LBA's and
cooperatives come directly from Senegal through illegal crossing of
the border. This is most common when the buying campaign opens far

in advance of the Senegalese campaign and when prices are higher in

 

The Gambia.

Pricing Policy
The Gambian pricing policy centers first and foremost around
the producer price of groundnut which is set annually by the govern-

ment prior to the buying season. In doing so, the government takes

 

into account current and anticipated prices in the world market, the

   

 

 

 

101

...-p—.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I

1

I

{ Gambian Producer ‘“~'" _ “'"'”"* """ Senegalese Producer

I

I I

I

l 1

l I

1 l

I l

I I

I I

I I

‘ I
j; V' V V

Licensed
Traders Cooperatives

 

 

 

 

 

 

key: ——-——————- Gambian Product

Senegalese Clandestine Product

 

1

Licensed
Buying Agent

 

 

 

 

 

 

r Gambia Produce
Marketing Board

 

 

 

 

 

 

Raw .
Product liolille

 

London Office
for Export

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 3.12--Groundnut Marketing Channels.

 

 

 

 

 

 

102

evel of producer prices in neighboring Senegal and the incentive
actor for increasing domestic production. Social justice and poli-
ical factors also weigh heavily.
Over the period 1972/73 to 1976/77, the producer price of
roundnuts increased substantially by about 20 percent annually.
rom 1976/77 to 1981/82 prices increased by a little more than 4
rcent annually. Despite the successive increases in producer
ices, relatively favorable weather conditions from 1972/73 to
77 and a continued subsidization of fertilizers, purchases of
oundnut by GPMB did not increase appreciably. In fact, a decline
purchases has been registered since 1974/75. This has led some
“itics, such as AID (1979), to comment that the incentive element
1 increasing cash cr0p production has virtually peaked out in the
intext of the current agricultural practices. And unless one is
'epared to concede that the average Gambian farmer shows a distinct
eference for leisure over money and is completely indifferent to
e recommended improved cultural practices, it is difficult to
count for the very low production. Total purchases by GPMB
creased steadily from a high of 134,840 tonnes in 1973/74 to a low
82,222 tonnes in 1977/78.
Vagaries of weather aside, the only other probable explana-
)n is related to The Gambian price structure vis-a-vis Senegal.
rapid increases in prices in The Gambia between 1972 and 1976
ht have encouraged Senegalese farmers to engage in increased

ndestine operations, thus swelling up the GPMB's purchases,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

103

hich was incorrectly interpreted as an increase in production by
ambian farmers. The increase in prices of groundnut in Senegal

round 1975 probably reduced this clandestine operation, resulting

'n a drastic fall of produce reaching GPMB. In Senegal prices were
ncreased by almost 43 percent from 29,000 CFA/ton (about 0246.50/

:on) in 1974~m:41,500 CFA/ton (about 0352.80/ton) in 1975. The
vroducer price in The Gambia at this time was 0 310.40/ton. Prices

n Senegal remained constant until 1979 when they were again increased

y 10 percent in 1980 and a further 10 percent in 1981. Although

 

rices have been relatively higher in The Gambia since 1976, the
ifference has probably not been high enough to induce further
landestine operations.

Producer prices for groundnut have been consistently lower
han the border prices obtained by GPMB. Since 1969/70, the nominal
rotection coefficient4 has risen above 0.41 only once in 1975/76 when
t wasO.51. Profits made in groundnut trading are supposedly used
)r price and income stabilization for farmers. While prices might
1ve been stabilized real incomes to farmers have probably been
estabilized over the years.

Policy makers in The Gambia are aware that increasing the

*oducer price of groundnut would stimulate production which is a

,‘

4NPc = 1 + (Pd - er)/er = Pd/er

where NPC = Nominal Protection Coefficient
Pd = Domestic producer price
Pw Border price (FOB price)

I"

Equilibrium exhange rate which is assumed here
to be equal to one

 

 

 

 

104

irable effect. But they also know that revenue, which is a
ncipal source of finance, for public sector activities will be
rificed. In addition the scope for higher prices is obstructed
two sides. On the domestic marketing side, marketing margins
orb a large share of total proceeds and perhaps more important is
9 effect of a positive pricing policy on foodgrain, especially

:e production. Higher prices for groundnuts are IIKEIY to draw
;ources from cereal production and thus defeat the food crop self-

:ficiency objective.

Gender Division of Labor in CropProduction

Throughout West Africa, The Gambia is probably the only coun-
/ where gender division of labor in agriculture has strictly followed
1p enterprise lines. With the exception of irrigated rice, an alien
:hnique introduced to men, women in The Gambia dominate the rice
1p enterprises while men dominate the cultivation of groundnut and
land cereals. In other places where studies have shown the gender
rision of labor, women have been known to participate actively in
a cultivation of all cr0ps, but that they are often assigned the
1s heavy and less strength-demanding jobs. For example, clearing
:h is usually the work of men, while women are more important in
eding upland rice in Sierra Leone (Byerlee et al., 1977)- Kamuanga
'82) reports that in rice production, land preparation, sowing and
tivation appear to be typical male activities and that adult

en contribute the most in harvesting-related activities in Mali.

 

 

105

In this section the amount of labor contributed by type
labor--family, strange farmer, and hired by sex and age, was
lculated on a hectare basis for each individual crop considered in
is study to assess the degree of specialization in the utiliza-
on of labor. The results are shown in Tables 3.5 to 3.14.
The percentage of labor contributed by type of labor for
‘ch crop has already been alluded to in preceeding sections. Here
Iphasis is laid on specialization according to sex and age for each
'0p and for each activity.
In the rice crop enterprises and excluding irrigated rice,
1e results show that female labor contribution dominates both in
rms of total labor and in terms of labor contributed in each activ-
.y. No less than 87 percent of the total labor in upland rice,
_fgrg and mangrove rice was contributed by women. In all of the
tivities and in all the three crops, women contributed more than
percent of the labor. Both the low labor input and the rela-
vely higher standard deviations in comparison to the mean labor
put suggest that men's participation in these rice cultivation
ctices is casual. The highest male labor participation was in
_grg where they contributed about 12 percent of the labor, most of
ich was in the land preparation activity. It'ksinteresting to
te that for these three crop enterprises, men used relatively more

5

itract labor than exchange labor. The opposite is true for women.

.7

5Exchange labor, as used here, is nonfamily labor that is
ither paid in cash nor provided with food during work. Persons
"ticipating in this system of labor bring along their own lunch.

 

 

II)6

.cc.x Lo\ucm some c. vwmn m. Loam. pumgucoo 2.:ou
.omm can xom an cmpmmwcmmmm.u no: mum; “as. mgonsws a_.smw mmuspuc.u

.mcowumw>mu vcmccmpm mcm mmmwcacocma cw mmszmwun
..coz mo mesa; unm.o op pcm~m>wzum m. xmuxgoz mcom

Name am>L=m "mocaom

 

 

 

 

o.oo. .Nm.mm.V N.NmN o.oo. ......V N.NN 0.00. ......V a... o.oo. .N....V ..o. Seas. go... ...o.
. . a.N m.o m.o ... 0.. ... ... ea..: .m.o.
Nmo ~.o mmpmsmu pomcpcoo
¢.. m.o ... mopmz uomgucou
m . m.o m.o mmpmsm. omcmzuxw
mops: mmcmzuxm
gone. ao..=
m o m.o m.o m.o Amo.sz mcmELm. wmcwcpm
. Na e.omN m.Nm ......V m.NN m.Na .om.NNV m.Nm «.ma .No.m.V 0... Logo. N..Ea. .mp0.
o...5a. co;.o
0.0m m.mNN m.ma ......V N..@ ..NN .mo.eNV ..N. ...m .mo.moV m... ma.aeo. ...o.
m.» om Lm>o
. m.» moo
... . ... we. m.-o.
a .NN N .N ..N. 3.0. a.» om-.. ma.aso.
..m a..N ..e .N..N.V N.e N.o. .oo..NV N.o. ..o. a.No...V ... mo.az ...o.
. m.» are
m.o m.o a.» m.-o.
N .N m.m N.o. m.. a.» co... mo.oz
...Ea.
R mzmoxgoz & mzmvxgoz N mxmvxgoz N mmxmuxgoz
.mp0. m:..mo>cmz so..a>...zu iwm.zom new usae. cone.
. use memo cowumsmawga new.

 

59.>.:)C 3:3 .333... .3 015. H: ..D.JS>.J.!> 2).:

,..,DL> III ’II. .....

 

 

 

107

.00.. co\0cm 0000 c. 0.00 0. 0000. uuocucou 3.000

.000 0:0 x00 00 0000000000000 ac: 0.03 00;. 0000202 >—.50m 000:.uc.0
.m:o.um.>m0 0c00cmam 0.0 00000900000 0. 00.00.00

..003 mo 0.00; 000.0 op u:m.0>.=cm w. 000.00; 0000

sumo xm>gzm ”mucaom

 

ill-III}.

 

 

 

0 00. .00.00NV ...00 0 00. .00.00V 0.00 0.00. .0..00V 0.N0 0.00. .0N..0.V 0.00 0.00. .N0.0.V 0.0.. 0.00. .0..0V 0.0 0000. 0000. .000.
m.m N..N m.0 m.m 0.. o.. m.m m.m 0.m m.m m.~ ..o 000.: .000.
w.m N.H 0.0 O.N 0.0 wmemm uumLucou
m.m ..o ..o o.m 0.0: “umgpcou
N.0. m.N 0.0 N.0 0.0 ..0 0.0000 000000..
m.m m.H 0.0 OTH N.O waZ wmcmcuxw
0.000. 0o..0
0.0 m.m. m.o 0.0 ..0 ..0 N.N ..N m.0 N.. o.o Amopsz 005.00 mmcmgum
0.00 ..0Nm N.00 ..0.00V 0.0. ..00 .00.00V ..00 N.N0 .NN.00V ..00 0.00 .0N.00V N..0 ...0 .00.0V N.0 L000. ...000 .000.
0...000 000.0
0.00 0.N0m 0.00 .00.00V ..0. 0.00 .N0.00V 0.00 0.00 .00..0V 0.N0 0... .0..0.V ...0 0..0 .00.0V 0.0 00.0000 .000.
we» on cm>o
0.0 0.0 m.» mio
0HN 0.0 N.0 0.. ..0 0.» 0.-0. .
0 000 ..0. 0.N0 m..0 0..0 0.0 a.» 00-0. 00.0000
N..N N.m .00.0.V 0.N 0.0 .0N.0V ..N 0.0 .00...V 0.0 0.0 ..m.00V 0.0 0.0. 0..0..V ..0 00.0: .000.
0.» ate
N.. ..0 0.0 ..0 0.. 0.-0.
m.m o.o~ m.~ ..N 0.0 ..m 0.0 0.» 00-0. 00.0:
...000
N 0000x003 w 0000.002 0 0000.002 0 0000.003 u 0000x0o3 0 00000.00:
wan: co 0
.0000 mcwumw>cmx co.uw>_u—:u 0:0 mcco mcwucm.0 comamcmawca 0:0. acmmcaz . a .

 

a..>.uo< 0:0 .000. mo 00». >0 co..0>.u.:u 00.x ogmmam :. 0.0000: .00 .000. we co..=n.gum_oii.0.m m0m<P

 

108

 

.0:_x Lo\0:0 0000 c. 0.00 m. scam. uumcucoo xpco

0

.000 0:0 x00 00 0000000000000 0o: 0:03 00:0 0:00:05 A..200 000:.o:.o
.mco000.>m0 0.000000 0:0 0000:»:0000 :. 00.0000
..00: we 0:00: 0:0.0 o0 0:0—0>0=cw m. >00xcoz 0:00

0000 mm>gsm

n

.mumaom

 

 

 

0 00. .00....V 0.0N0 0.00. .00.00V 0.00. 0.00. .00.00V 0.N0 0.00. .00.00V 0.00 0.00. .0N.00V 0.0. 0 00. .N0.N.V N... 0000. .000. .000.
0.0 ..N. 0.0 0.0 N.0 ..0 0.0 ..0 0.0 0.N 000.: .000.
..N ..o N.. N.0 mw—0500 000.0:ou
HA m.o m.o warm: uumgucou
0.. N.m ..o m.~ m.. 00—0500 mmcmguxm
... 0.. 0.0 00.02 000000x0
0:000. 000.:
Awpon mLmELmu mmcwgpm
..00 0.0.0 0.00 .00.N0V 0.00 0.00 ..N.00V 0.N0 0.00 .00.00V 0.00 0.00 ..0.00V ..00 0.00. .00...V N... .000. 0..000 .000.
0.0 ..0 ..0 ..0 0..:00 00000
0.00 0.00N 0.00 .0N..0V 0.00 N.00 .00.N0V 0.00 0.00 ..0.00V 0.0. 0.00 .00.0NV 0.00 0.00 .00...V 0... 00.0000 .000.
0.0 0.0 00. 00 0000
0.0 N.0 ..0 0.0 00. 0-0
0.0 0.0 N.. 0.. 0.. 0.0 0.» 0.-0.
0.00N 0.00 0.00 0... ..00 ..0. 00. 00-0. 00.0000
0.0 N.0. 0.0 .00...V 0.0 0.0 .0N.0.V 0.N 0.0 .00.0.V 0.0 ..0 .0N.0V ..0 N.. 0....0V N.0 00.0: .000.
N.0 N.0 we» mio
0.N ..0 ... 0.0 ..0 000 0.-0.
..0. 0.0 ..0 0.0 ..0 ..0 00. 00-0. 00.0:
H:00.
n 0000.:03 a mmm0xgoz a mxm0xgo: a mzm0xgoz a mam0xcoz n mmxm0xgoz
000:. 0000.
.0000 m:_umm>:0x :o.u0>.0.:u.::.wcau 0:00:0p0 :0000000000 0:0. 0:00:02

 

zu.>.uo< 0:0 .000. mo 00>» 00 :o.00>_0pau 00.x m>ocmcmz :. 0.0000: :00 Loan. mo :o.u:o.:um.oii...m m.m<.

—..—'

-

109

 

.0:.x :. :0\0:0 :000 0. 0.00 0. :000. 000:0:00 0.000

.000 0:0 x00 00 000000:0000.0 00: 0:03 00:0 0:00202 a..E0. 0000.0:.0

.0:0.00.>00 0:00:000 0:0 0000:0:0:00 0. 00:00.0

 

 

 

 

0
.x:03 .0 0:00: 000.0 00 000.00.000 0. 0000:03 0:00
0000 00>:0m "00:000
0.00. 0..00 0.00. .0..0.0 ..00 0.00. 000.00. 0.00 0.00. .00.... ..00 0.00. .00.0~.0 0.00 0 00. .0..0.0 0.0 0000. 00000 .000.
0.0 0.00, 0.0 0.0 0.. ... 0.0. 0... 0.0 0.. 0.0 ..0 00:.2 .000.
0.. 0.0 ..0 ..0 0.0 00.0500 000:0:00
0.0. 0.. 0.0 0.0 0.0 ..0 00.0: 000:0:00
m... ..0 0.0. 00.0500 00:0:uxm
m.m 0.0 m.~ N.0 00.0: 00:0:uxm
0:000. 00:.1
N.0 0.0m 0.0 0.0 ~.0 N.0 0.0 0.0 ..0 0.. .0.02. 0:05:00 00:0:00
0.00 0.00m ..00 .00.000 0.0. 0.~0 ..0.000 0..0 0.0. .N~.000 0.0. 0.00 ..m.0~.v 0.0m 0..0 .0..N.0 N.0 :000. 00...000 .000.
..0 0... 0.0 0.. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ..00 0.0. 0.00 0.. 0..s00 00000
0.00 0.00. ..00 .00.000 0.00 0.00 .00.000 0..0 0.00 ..0..00 0.00 ..0 .00.00 0.. 00.0000 .000.
0:» 00 :000
0:» 0-0
... 0.0 ..0 0.0 0:» m.-o.
..Nm. 0.00 0..0 0.00 0.. 0:0 00-0. 00.0000
0..0 0.00. 0..0 ..0.00. 0... ..00 .00.~00 ..00 0.00 .0..000 0.00 0.00 .00.00. ..0. 0.0. 0..0..0 0.0 00.00 .000.
0:» 0-0
..0 0.0 ..0 ... ..0 0:0. 0.0.
..00. N.0N 0.N~ ..Nm 0.0. N.0 0:» 00-0. 00.0:
x..E00
a 00000:03 u , 0»00x:02 0 0x00x:03 0 0000x:03 0 0»00x:03 n 00000x:03
rII{ 000:. :000.
:0000 .000. 0:.000>:0I :0.00>.0.§00:00:00 0:.0:0.0 :0.00:000:0 0:00 0:00:02

 

>0.>.00< 0:0 :000. .0 00». an :0.00>.0.00 00.0 00000.::. :0000m 0:0 :. 0:0000: :00 :0000 .0 :0.000.:00.0--.m.m m.0<.

lfilO

 

 

.mmm vcm xwm

.o:_x L0\ucm ammo cw vvma my scoop uumgucou Apco
An uwgmmmgmmmm?v Ho: mLmz pan» mgmasma >__Emm mmu3~ucw

v
u

mcowumw>wu ugmvcmum ogm mommsucmgma =_ mmgam_u

.xgoz mo mgzo: ugmww ou ucm_a>w:om up zmvxgoz wco

 

 

 

n
a

open >U>Lzm ”mugaom

 

o.ooH

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

H.v~m o.ooH A¢N.mwv m.om 0.00“ Aom.va N.m¢ o.ooH AHH.NOHV v.m~H o.oo~ Amm.o~V H.m¢ o.ooH Aoo.efiv ¢.N psacH-Lon¢4 ~wpoh
N.m m.o~ m.o m.o N.“ N.a m.H m.o N.m m.o uwng .mpop
m.H m.~ wpmswm uomgucou
w.m m.o H.N 0.0 m_mz uumgucou
m.m H.m v.0 mpwswu mmcmzuxm
H.o ~.o upmz mmcmcuxm
uLODMJ umg_:
o.~ e.m m.o m.o m.H N.“ .m.~ m.m H.¢ m.o Amm_~zv mgwegmm mmcmgum
m.em H.~om H.mm AHN.HmV “.mm m.mm Avo.mmv v.w¢ m.Hm Am~.HHHV m.~HH ¢.Ha AmH.-v m.¢v N.mm fifio.mfiv m.m Lonmg »_wEmm FmHOH
m.~ o.m N.0 m.“ ~.w ~.m N.0 m.o m.~ m.o , m.H H.o QAPWEmm ngpo
c.mm o.mm~ e.HN Amm.okv m.¢o H.0N “Hm.ofiv N.NH o.mo Amm.moHV “.mm m.Hm Am~.mmv m.m~ m.oN Aom.mfiv N.m mm_msmm pmuop
mg» om gm>o
H.o H.o mg» m-o
m.o H.o m.~ m.~ o.H mg» mH-oH
m.HmH m.¢w m.- v.~m m.mH o.m mg» oe-m~ mm_m5wm
m.vm H.mHH N.NN ANN.mmv m.m~ N.oo fikm.omv m.~m v.HN Ao¢.~mv m.- o.wm Amo.¢¢v m.m~ o.N~ aAmo.NV m.H mm_mz _mu0F
“UH N.0 o.H mg» a-o
0 NM m.~ m.NH N.m ~.m m.o mg» mH-oH
v.m~ o.mH o.o~ o.mH m.m~ o.H ML» oo-mH mm_oz
N~_Emm
u mxmuxgoz w mxouxgoz u whouxgoz a ammuxgoz w mAMUxLoz u mAQngoz
xii: 111: .III‘ lily rlr‘ .Ilr a page“ Loam;
:33 9.5352. 5535 :6 25 9:8 mFScmE :oSEmawé 9:... 5.3.52

 

 

>u¢>_uu< ucm Loam; $0 mnxp an

=o_um>_u_=u muwm umummeLH cowomm “m2 2* mgauom: Lwa Lona; mo cowpan?guw_o--.m.m wgmqp

111

 

.vcwx :WHLQ\ucm swag :? vmma my Lonmp pumgucou zpcou
mam ucm xmm An umpmmmgmaomwu uoc mgmz was“ mgonEms Arwsww mmv:_ucfiu

mco_pmw>ov ugmocmam wgm momngcogmq cw mwgamwua
xgoz mo mgao; 9:3?m o“ pampm>w2cm mw zmcxgoz mcom

mums xw>gzm

"mugzom

 

 

 

o.ooH Amm.mmv m.mH~ o.ooH A.~.omfiv ¢.o¢ o.ooH Am~.mfimv N.Hm o.ooH A¢.omv o.m o.oo~ AmN.m¢v m.mH hsmzH mom<4 quo»
¢.¢ ~.m m.m o.m m.m N.H m.m N.0 N.N m.o amxH: AqHOH
mumEmm womgucou
o.N m.o m.o H.o N.0 mwpmz aumgucou
o.o o.o o.o mmFmEmu mmcmzuxm
N.m H.N m.o H.o H.o mmpoz mmcmguxm
ugonmg owng
Ammrmzv
m.v v.m m.e ~.N m.m o.m o.m v.0 0.0 w.o mgmsLmu mmcmgum
H.Hm m.on m.mm Aofi.¢mv N.H¢ m.mm An¢.mflmv m.ne m.mm Amm.uv «.5 m.Hm Amm.¢fiv N.NH Loam, xpwsmw quop
w.o a.o 0.0 0.0 ¢.o N.o m.m N.0 m.m m.o oaP?Ewu stpo
m.¢ m.m w.“ Amo.wv ©.m N.N Am~.mv ¢.H o.m Ao¢.Hv ¢.o m.o Amm.ov H.o mm4<2wu 4<p0h
o.o o. 0.0 mg» on Lw>o
N.o 0.0 o.o N.o mg» a-o
0.0 N.0 m.o H.o mg» mflnofi
m.¢ e.m H.~ H.o H.o mg» oesofi mwmemu
“.mm m.HoH o.Hm Aom.mmv o.mm “.mm Amm.mfimv m.m¢ o.mm Am¢.nv m.m N.Nm nfimm.qfiv o.fiH mm4<z 4<k0h ,
m.o ~.o N.0 v.0 mg» o-o
m.m ®.N H.m 0.0 o.~ mg» mH-oH
m.fim o.mm o.o¢ o.© N.0H mg» om-oH mm_mz
prsmm
& mamcxgoz & mxmoxgoz & mAwuxLoz & mamuxgoz & mmamcxgoz
cor m> usacH Loom;
pouch mcwpmw>gmz .g wupzu mcwacmpm cowpmgmamga ucwg

nzm wgmu

 

zuw>wuu< u:m Lona; we mazh xn :owum>wu—:u uscucaogw_gwmgmuumz Lmu Lona; $o cowuzawgumwo--.ofi.m mgmqp

2112

 

.ccwx go\nco cmao cw amen m? Loom? uumgucou xpcov
.omm vcm xmm An umummmgmmom_u go: mng was» mgwnews xpwsmm mmuapucwu

mcovpmw>mu ugmucwum mgm mammsucogma cw mgzmwu

a

.xL03 yo mgzo; pgmwm op acmpm>wscm mw Amuxgoz meow

mums zm>gzm

“mugaom

 

 

 

 

 

o.ooH Ame.mmv N.0HH o.ooH Amq.mmv v.0m o.ooH Awm.mev m.mm o.ooH Amfi.mfiv m.~H o.oo~ Amm.mmv e.o~ Paazm mom<4 4<FOP
m.m o.¢ m.H N.0 m.H a.o ¢.N m.o N.oH H.N umng Pmuop
mwpmsmm pomgucou
o.H o.o m.o H.o N.H mm—mz uumgpcoo
N.0 o.o ~.o mmpmsmu mmcmzuxm
N.N N.o m.o N.0 N.0 mwpmz mmcmguxm
egos“; umgm:
. . Amm_mzv
o m m.m a w m.N ~.m m.H ¢.e m.o o.m o.H mgmeL~u mocmgpm
m.Hm v.00“ N.Hm Amm.mmv «.mm a.¢m Amo.m¢v m.¢¢ ~.Hm A¢m.mfiv ¢.HH m.¢m Amm.qmv m.~H gonmp upwsmw _maop
o.H N.H m.~ ~.o w.o H.o o.N v.0 uapwsmm gmguo
m.m m.HH m.m~ Amfi.mmv m.m H.N Amm.mv o.H m.~ AmN.oV N.0 e.~ Amq.~v m.o mm4<2mg A<FOF
H.o H.o mLx om Lw>o
N.0 H.o H.o mg» m-o
N.0 N.0 m.o H.o H.o mg» mH-oH
m.oH m.m N.0 H.o m.o mg» om-m~ mmFmEmu
m.ow N.ma m.¢m Aem.mmv ¢.mm m.Hm A¢¢.o¢v m.Ne m.wm Amfi.mfiv H.HH ¢.om AH¢.N~V ¢.mH mm4<z A<HOH
mno o.o «.9 H.o m.o mg» a-o
m.m m.~ H.m o.o m.H mg» mH-oH
o mm H.NN m.mm ¢.oH o.¢H mg» oo-w~ mm_mz
»_wemm
& mxmuxgoz & mzmvxgoz & mxmuxgoz & onuxLoz & omxmuxgoz
P >p 3 “such Lonm4
Fmaop m:_umw>gm: :o.wmm.wwmw m:_pcmpa cowumLmawLm can;

 

pr>wuo< can Lonm4 $0 wakp An cowum>mppsu w~wmz cw wgmpom:

Log gone; $0 cow#=a_gwmmo--.fifi.m mgmqp

 

.0:$x c$ $0\ucm 5000 :$ 0$00 m$ Lonmp gumgucoo »_:oc

.000 0:0 xmm >0 vmummwgmmmm$0 p0: 0003 umcp mgmnems >—$20$ mmvspucHu
.000$um$>00 cgcucmum 000 mammcucmgm0 c$ magammup

.xgoz $0 mgzoc acm$0 00 ucm—m>$000 m$ amcxgoz 0:00

0009 mm>00m "mugaom

 

2113

o.ooH Amw.Fmv o.Hm o.ooH Amm.mmv n.HN o.ooH Awm.mmv m.ow o.ooH Ann.mfiv m.HH o.ooH AoH.vHv N.HH Psazm mom<H H<HOH

 

 

 

 

 

¢.m ~.N m.m ~.H N.H m.o m.o H.0 m.o H.0 0mmH: H<$0$
mmpmsmm #0000000
N.0 0.0 H.o mm—mz pumgucou
H.o H.o mmpmemm mmcoguxw
0.H N.H H.o H.o mmpmz mmcmcuxw
000000 00L$I
. . . . . :20:
0 HH 0 0H N m o N 0 HH H.m m.0 H.H H.0H w.H mgwsme mocmgum
0.00 0.0H 0.00 HHO.-V 0.0H m.~0 H0~.0¢V 0.00 “.00 HmH.mHv 0.0H H.00 H00.mHv m.m LoaoH HHHEM$ HwHOH
0.~ ¢.~ N.H 0.0 H.~H ¢.H 0.H N.0 oxHHEmu LocHo
H.0 0.m m.mN HHN.mHV 0.0 0.0 HQH.oV 0.0 mquzmu H<$0$
mg» ow gw>o
mg» 0-0
mg» mfiuoH
m.m o.m 0.0 mg» ooumH mmpmsmu
m.HH 0.0“ 0.0m HH0.¢HV m.NH 0.00 H0¢.mqv 0.0m 0.5“ H00.~H0 0.0 m.Hw Hmm.mHv H.m WNqu H<H0H
. . H 0-0
v o e o m.»
. . . . . » mH-0H
m 0H m 0 e H H H m H m;
H.om v.NH o.Nm m.m w.m mLx ooumH worm:
NF$Emu
R mxmuxgoz N mxmuxgoz & mzmvxgoz x mxmcxgoz N mmzmvxgoz
00H 0>H 0 uaqu Loan
Papop mc$pmm>gmz .w:0.wwmw 00$»:0F0 00$00000000 ucmH

 

ap$>$uu< 000 00000 $0 000$ >0 00$00>$upau Ezcmgom cm mgmuom: 000 00004 $0 00$u00$gum$ouu.mfi.m m0m<$

114-

 

 

.0:$x 00\000 £000 c$ 0$00 m$ 0000? 00000000 apcow

.000 0:0 x00 00 00000000000$0 00: 0003 pong 0000205 xp$sa$ mmczpocmu

.m:0$u0$>00 cgwccwum 000 m$m0zuc0gmn c$ mmgzm$m

0

x003 $0 0000; pzm$0 00 uc0pm>$=00 m$ xmuxgoz 0:00

0000 m0>00m “mugzom

 

0.00H H00.00HH 0.0HH 0.00H H00.NNV 0.00 0.00H H00.0NHV 0.00 0.00H HH0.0H 0.0

0.00H H00.0H0 0.0H $=0zH 000<H H<$0$

 

 

 

H.H m.H 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 000H= H000$
m0_0500 pomgucou
m.o N.0 m.o mmpmz pomgucou
N.0 N.0 m0pmemm mmcmcuxu
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 m0pmz 0mcmcuxw
000000 000$:
Am0pmzv
N.0 0.0 H.0 H.H H.H N.H H.H H.0 0.0 0.H 0000000 0000000
0.00 N.NHH 0.00 HNm.0NV 0.00 0.00 H00.0HH0 H.00 0.00 H00.00 0.0 0.00 HRH.HH0 H.0H 00000 HHHz<0 00000
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 H.H H.o 0.0 0.0 00HHE00 00000
0.H 0.H 0.0 H00.Hv H.0 0.0 H00.0HV H.H N.H H0m.0v H.0 0.0 HRH.ov 0.0 00H0200 H<$0$
mg» ow L0>o
H.o H.o mg» 0-0
0.0 0.0 0.0 00» 0H-0H
0.H 0.H H.0 0.0 00» 00-0H 00H0000
0.00 H.0HH 0.00 H00.000 0.00 0.00 H0~.00HV 0.00 0.00 H0H.0v 0.0 0.00 0H~H.~Hv H.0H 00H<z H<$0$
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 .00» 0-0
0.0H H.0 0.0 0.0 0.H 00» 0H-0H
0.H0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0H 00» 00-0H 00H0z
NHHE00
a mxmcxgoz & 00000003 & 0200x003 & 00000002 R 00A00x003
azacH 0000H
quop mc_pm0>00: 00$WMW$WWMW 00$»:0—0 00$00000000 0:00

 

a0$>$00< 000 0000H $00000 a0 00000>00H=0 Hocamv 00HH02 0H000 00 000000: 000 0000H $0 000000000000--.0H.0 0H0<$

 

1115

0.00H 000.0HH0 0.0NH 0.00H 000.0H0 0.0H

 

 

.0000 00\0c0 0000 :$ 0000 0$ 00000 00000000 00:00

.000 000 x00 00 0000000000000 00: 0003 0000 0000505 0~$50$ 000=F0000
.000000$>00 00000000 000 00000000000 c$ 00000000

.0003 $0 00000 00m$0 00 0:0F0>0=00 0$ 000000: 0:00

0 00H 000.000 0.00 0 00H 00H.~H0 0.0H

000a 00>0am ”000000

0.00H 000.0H0 H.00 000zH 00000 00000

 

 

 

 

0.0 0.0 0.0 H.0 0.0 H.0 0.0 N.H 000H= 00000
00—0500 00000000
m.m 0.0 0.0 0.0 00_0z 00000000
0000500 00:000xm
H.0 m.o w.o 00002 00:0;0xm
000000 0000:
000—020
0.0 N.0 N.00 0.0 0.0 N.0 0.00 m.H 0.0 0.0 0005000 0000000
N.H0 0.0HH H.00 000.HH0 H.HH 0.00 000.H00 0.00 H.00 000.HHO 0.0H 0.00 000.000 0.H~ 00000 000200 00000
N.0 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0000500 00000
0.0 0.0 0.0 00H.00 H.0 0.0 00H.H0 0.0 H.0 000.H0 0.0 0000200 00000
000 om 00>o
000 0-0
0.0 0.0 000 0H-0H
0.0 0.0 m.o 0.0 000 00-00 0000500
0.00 0.H0H 0.00 0H0.NH0 0.0 0.00 00H.000 0.H0 0.00 000.0H0 0.0 0.00 000.000 0.HN 0000: 00000
o.N o.~ 000 muo
0.0 0.0 o.H H H 000 00-00
m.mo 0.0 0.00 0.0 N cm 000 00-00 00—0:
000500
0 00000003 0 00000003 0 00000003 0 00000002 0 000000003
00000 00000
P0000 000000>00z cowwmwww»uw 00000000 00000000000 0000

 

000>$00< 000 00000 $0 000» 00 00000>00000 0000000 000—02 0000 :0 000000: 000 00000 $0 =0$000$00000--.0H.m m0m<$

 

 

116

This may be due to the better economic position enjoyed by men which
provides them with the ability to make cash payments and provide
adequate food for nonfamily workers. MOrermnfiannly labor was utilized
in land preparation for upland rice and bafarg and in planting for
nangrove rice than in any of the other activities..

Turning now to irrigated rice, the story is similar, although
it is less pronounced. This is true despite the fact that irrigated
rice was introduced as a male crop. In the dry season irrigated rice
crOp, women contributed about 50 percent of the total labor while
nen contributed about 43 percent. The rest was satisfied by labor
classified as other family. In the rainy season irrigated rice, women's
contribution increased to more than 60 percent. Nursery and land
preparation is clearly dominated by males in both crops. In the dry
season crop women contributed more than half of the planting, care,
and cultivation and harvesting labor requirements, and they contribu-
ted more than 70 percent of the planting and harvesting labor require-
nents in the rainy season crop. Again, men tended to use more
contract labor than exchange labor while women used more exchange
labor than contract labor. Most of the nonfamily labor was employed
in the planting activity for both crops.

In all the rice enterprises, with the exception of the wet
season irrigated rice, youths between 10 and 15 years old contributed

less then 3 percent of the total labor. Children below 10 years only

I:

Such labor is paid back in kind. Contract labor is nonfamily labor
that is paid either in cash or provided with food by the farmer during
Nork or both.

 

 

 

 

117

participated in the cultivation of irrigated rice where their labor
contribution was estimated at less than 1 percent for each crop.
However, youths contributed about 11.8 percent of the total labor in
wet season irrigated rice. Male youths contributed about 9.9 percent
of the total labor. About one third each of these labor was con-
tributed in planting and care and cultivation.

Upland crop cultivation is the territory of men. Percentage
total labor contribution by men was 89.1 percent in maize, 91.3 per-
cent in sorghum, 93.1 percent in late millet, 94.6 percent in ground-
nut, and 97.6 percent in early millet. Iriall of the activities, men
contributed no less than 73 percent of the labor in any given crop.
Female labor contribution was generally higher in the harvesting
activities when compared to other activities. The low labor inputs
and the relatively higher standard deviations in relation to the
means for the female labor inputs are indicative of the casual par-
ticipation of females in groundnut and upland cereals cultivation.

Youths, 10 to 15 years, contributed between 4 percent in early
millet to 14.3 percent in late millet and children under ten years
contributed between 0.4 percent in sorghum to 2 percent of the total
labor in late millet. Most of the labor contributed by youths
and children was in the care and cultivation activity.

All nonfamily female labor in groundnut and upland cereals
was of the exchange type. There was a higher use of male contract
labor than male exchange labor. The highest percentages of nonfamily

labor in the upland crops was recorded in groundnut cultivation.

 

 

 

 

118

Taking into account all of the crops considered, the highest per-
centage of nonfamily labor was used in dry season irrigated rice
where hired labor accounted for about 9 percent of the total labor
per hectare. The lowest percentage of nonfamily labor was in upland
rice and early millet with a percentage hired labor of 1.1 percent
each. The higher percentage of hired labor in the dry season crop
is due to an increased supply of employable labor in the slack
season. Ironically, however, enterprise wage rate was highest on the
dry season irrigated rice crop. This may be due to the fact that
this crop is cultivated at a time in the year when farmers have
money obtained from selling groundnut and there is plenty of food.

This appears to increase their propensity to spend on hired labor.

Summary

This chapter has provided a description of the major rice
production systems in The Gambia, and the gender division of labor.
Four major types of rice cultivation are described--upland, bafarg,
mangrove, and irrigated rice. Upland rice had both the lowest
yield and the lowest total labor input per hectare. Dry season
irrigated rice had the highest yield while the highest labor input
per hectare was recorded in bajarg rice.

Total labor input in upland crops were similar, with the
lowest labor input recorded in sorghum and the highest in late
millet. The rice crops generally had a higher labor input per hectare

than groundnut and the other cereals.

 

 

 

 

 

119

The monthly labor profiles show a marked seasonality in labor
demand with the high peaks coming at the time of planting and harvest-
ing. Family labor is the predominant form of labor in Gambian agri-
culture. Nonfamily labor accounted for no more than 9 percent of
the total labor input per hectare. There is a distinct, though not
rigid, division of labor by sex along crop enterprise lines. Women
dominate the cultivation of rice, while men dominate the cultivation
of groundnuts and upland cereals.

The next chapter presents the financial and economic analysis
of the crop enterprises described in this chapter and compares their

costs and returns.

 

 

 

 

CHAPTER IV

A FINANCIAL AND ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF THE RICE
PRODUCTION SYSTEMS AND OTHER CROPS

Introduction

 

There are three main objectives in this chapter. The first
is to define and estimate the private costs and benefits of rice
production to rice farmers based on the production practices of the
year of the survey. This will be achieved through the help of bud-
gets that will be prepared on a hectare basis. The second objective
is to estimate the economic costs and benefits of rice production
from the national point of view. Related to the above objectives, a
comparison of the financial and economic costs and benefits of the
different rice production systems will also be presented. The third
objective is to compare the financial and economic costs and bene-
fits of the rice crop enterprises to the financial and economic
costs and benefits of groundnut and other upland cereals.

The analysis in this chapter will help in determining the
degree of comparative advantage enjoyed by The Gambia in the pro-
duction of these crops. First the method used in the valuation of
the inputs and outputs for the rice production systems is presented
before discussing the financial and economic analysis. Later, the

same approach is adopted in dealing with the goundnut and upland

cereal enterprises.

 

 

 

 

 

121

Input Valuation for the Rice Enterprises

 

Land and labor are the two most important factors of produc-
tion in Gambian agriculture. The amount of capital and the propor-
tion of income invested in agriculture are very low. The use of
simple hand tools has been the tradition and the use of draft animals,
ox—drawn equipment, improved seeds, and chemical fertilizers are a
recent innovation. In this section the availability and valuation of

resources used in rice production are discussed.

.0999

The land tenure system has already been discussed in Chapter
II. In principle, land cannot be sold, rented, or pledged in the
rural areas in The Gambia. However, the introduction of irrigated
rice cultivation in some areas of the country is resulting in the
development of a land market in the form of rent. Farmers sometimes
rent irrigated rice land to outsiders for a fee of between D35.00 to
D45.00 a plot of about one-tenth of a hectare. This practice is more
common in the rainy season than in the dry season. About 30% of
the farmers rented part or all of their irrigated lands either in the
wet or in the dry season. No other type of agricultural land is
known to have a similar rental market.

It is estimated that initial land clearing, channel construc-
tion, and levelling of irrigated land require about 100 mandays per
acre (= 247 mandays per hectare). At the controlled minimum wage
rate of 05.00 a day, the cost of initial clearing and levelling of

one hectare of land is approximately D1,235.00 for labor. But other

 

 

 

 

 

 

122

costs are involved which cannot be easily estimated. These costs
include supervision and other capital goods such as tractor depre-
ciation and repairs and maintenance. Added to these problems is the
fact that irrigated perimeters were developed at different times by
different sponsors. Some of them are redevelopments.

In the absence of any reliable estimates on the costs of
development, an opportunity cost principle has been used to value
land both in the financial analysis and economic analysis. The
opportunity cost of land is defined as its return from its best
alternative use outside of the enterprise for which it was being
used at the time of the survey. For upland rice, bafarg, and man-
grove rice lands, the opportunity cost of land is assumed to be
zero. This is because lands cultivated with these crops have neither
a rent value nor any other alternative uses. This does not mean that
the lands, especially for bafarg and upland rice, could not be used
to grow any other crop. Rather, it means that these lands are not
in scarce supply to the extent that farmers would have to forego the
output of another enterprise if the lands were used for the culti-
vation of either upland or_bafarg rice. The other crop could be
grown on another land with similar yield potentials. Mangrove lands
are salty and so their potential for any other use are negligible.

For the irrigated rice lands, an opportunity cost of D400.00
per hectare is assumed. This is based on the average rent value of
these lands. In the absence of an active land market, this method of
land valuation is suggested by Brown (1979) and Gittinger (1972) for

use in the economic analysis of projects.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

123

A word of caution is in order at this point. While this
method of land valuation might seem appropriate under existing condi-
tions, the use of zero opportunity cost of land is questionable
when one considers future developments which may bring pressure on
the demand for land or which may increase its relative profitability.
For example, increases in population may reduce the amount of cultiv-
able land available to the extent that further expansions may require
substantial investments in land development and reclamation. Under
such conditions the cost of land will necessarily be positive. The
above assumptions also ignores the fact that there might be wide
variations in soil fertility which will affect their opportunity

costs.

1.11m

Labor input is reported as eight—hour workdays. In the pre-
ceeding chapter, total labor input was disaggregated into family
labor, strange farmer, and hired labor. Hired labor included

exchange labor and contract labor. These two types of hired labor

 

are paid differently. Exchange labor is paid in kind, that is, the
farmer or family member returns work for work and no cash or food is
provided. In this analysis, therefore, exchange labor is treated
like family labor.' Contract labor is paid either in cash, in kind
in the form of food or tobacco, or both. The value of the food and
the cash is used to estimate the enterprise wage rate which is used
to value contract labor both in the financial and economic analysis.

The estimated enterprise wage rates were 02.50, D2.87, D2.74, D3.86,

 

 

124

and D3.50 per workday for the upland rice, bafarg rice, mangrove
rice, dry and wet season irrigated rice, respectively. The minimum
agricultural wage rate, as established by the government, was 05.00
per adult workday.

The cost of the strange farmer labor input is derived from
an estimate of the value of food and lodging provided to him by the
farmer in return for work on fields assigned to him. The cost of
food was estimated at 030.00 a month and the cost of lodging was
estimated at 030.00 a month1 for a total of 060.00 a month. On the
average, the strange farmer stays with his host for about six months
in the year. Thus, annual estimated cost for keeping a stranger
farmer was about 0360.00. Actual labor input per strange farmer was
estimated at 75 workdays in the year. This translates to an estimate
of 04.80 per actual workday. This price was used in both the finan-
cial and economic analysis to value the labor input of strange farm-
ers.

The valuation of family labor for the economic analysis pre—
sents some problems. Theoretically the appropriate price to use is
one that reflects the opportunity cost of labor. In a perfectly
competitive market, this would be determined by the marginal value
product of labor. If there is an active labor market, then the
enterprise wage rate would be a good approximateion of the real mar—
ginal value product. However, this is not the case in the rural area

of The Gambia where less than 5% of the labor employed in agriculture

 

1These costs are based on what enumerators paid for food and
rent in each village.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

125

could be considered hired labor. Valuing family labor in such situa-
tions is therefore a complex matter. In the end any method employed
will involve the use of arbitrary or inappropriate values.

One could even question the theoretical use of marginal analy-
sis in economic analysis for a country in which policy recommendations
are made, for changes which are nonmarginal in nature. The problem is
made eVen more complex by the heterogenous nature of family labor.
Family labor productivity vary by sex and age. Within each category
the marginal productivities of labor will also vary by the task per-
formed and the time in the year in which the task is performed.

Because of this complex nature of labor valuation, economists
have often ignored the demands of theory and used methods to value
labor which are at variance with theoretical expectations. In all
the studies edited by Pearson et al. (1981), the economic value or
shadow price of_unskilled labor was based on the rural market wage
rate with adjustments made to account for some of the complexities
involved in the determination of market wages. Kamuanga (1982), and
Winch (1976) based their labor values on observed enterprise wage
rates. Eponou (1983) borrowed a "real wage rate" from another
author, Fane (1981). The problems and dangers associated with such
approaches are a subject of study currently being undertaken by Kelley
(1983). Kelly proposes to evaluate the correspondence between theory
and practice with respect to valuing the opportunity cost of labor;
examine the policy implications of highly fragile labor cost esti-

mates; demonstrate the sensitivity of labor cost estimates to various

 

 

 

 

126

assumptions and estimation techniques and recommend steps which can
be taken to produce more robust cost estimates.

To date, there is no acceptable practical method to handle
this problem. Conventional wisdom indicates that the marginal product
of labor in agriculture in developing countries is positive, but
very close to zero. To accept this notion, however, is to ignore
the fact that even in labor-abundant societies, there are peak
seasons when rural workers can find employment. At these seasons the
marginal product of labor is significantly different from and greater
than zero. If there is an active labor market, the wage rate paid
at that time could be a good approximation of the opportunity cost
of labor. Even in the slack periods an assumption of zero opportunity
cost is inappropriate. Farmers, being economic men, have a reserva-
tion price below which they are unwilling to forgo their leisure time
or other social commitments, for any alternative employment. This
reservation price might represent the real opportunity cost of labor
in those slack periods.

Notwithstanding the above comments, the economic analysis is
carried on with family labor valued at the enterprise wage rate or
the rate paid to contract labor. Because of the thin rural labor
market, this approach fisadmittedly inappropriate. Later in the study
a sensitivity analysis is carried out by valuing labor at zero
opportunity cost and at half the enterprise rate to demonstrate the
effect that the value used for family labor might have on the con-

clusions. The enterprise wage rate and the zero value could be

 

 

127

considered as upper and lower limits of the real opportunity cost
of family labor, respectively.

In the financial analysis, the return to family labor and
management is calculated as a residual rent after deducting the costs

of all other inputs.

§3331

Seed inputs consisted largely of seed retained from previous
harvests. Seeds for irrigated rice cultivation were normally supplied
at cost by the Department of Agriculture from its seed multiplica-
tion center in Sapu. However, due to internal problems improved seed
was not available to farmers during the period of the survey. Farm-
ers were thus forced to use either rice seed from the previous seasons
or to buy from other farmers. Because rice seed for planting is
usually scarce during the planting season, the market price was used
to value seed for both the financial and economic analysis. The cost
of seed per kilogram was 00.52, 00.53, 00.56, 00.55, and 00.57 for
upland rice, bgfarg rice, mangrove rice, dry and wet season irrigated

rice seeds, respectively.

Fertilizer

 

Fertilizer availability to farmers was also a problem during
the period of the survey. Most of the farmers cited a lack of
fertilizer as a major problem in their farming activities. Some of
the farmers who used fertilizer were able to do so because they had
stored some fertilizer in the previous season. The most frequently

used fertilizer is the compound (20:10:0) fertilizer and is sold to

 

 

 

128

farmers at the subsidized rate of 00.18 per kilogram. This cost is
used in the financial analysis.

In the economic analysis, the costs are adjusted to remove
the subsidies and make allowance for handling, storage, and trans-
portation. In 1981/82 the CIF (cost-insurance-freight) cost of
imported compound fertilizer was estimated at 0524.002 per ton or
00.52 per kilogram. It was also estimated that handling and storage
was about 5% of the CIF cost. Transportation from Kombo St. Mary to
Georgetown was estimated at about 025.003 per ton. This gives an

estimated economic cost of 0576.20 per ton.

Irrigation and Plowing Charges

 

In the irrigated rice cultivation areas, farmers are in prin-
ciple charged a fee of 0100.00/acre (0247.00/ha) and 015.00/acre
(or 037.07/ha) per annum for irrigation water and plowing, respec-
tively. In practice, however, a lot of confusion exists on whether
the charges are on an annual basis or on a cropping season basis. This
confusion exists even among well-placed personnel. Extension agents
have used this to an advantage by charging the farmers the same cost
on a cropping season basis. Thus in the financial analysis, a cost
of 0247.00 and 037.07 per hectare has been used for each of the irri-
gation rice systems for irrigation water and plowing, respectively.

Estimation of the costs of irrigation and plowing for the

economic analysis is a bit shaky. Although it was generally agreed

 

2From Dr. R. Kagbo, personal communication.

3Quotation from private truck drivers in Serrekunda.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

129

that the financial costs were subsidized, it was impossible to get
an estimate of the amount of subsidy from officials and operating
personnel. Even actual costs of machines, fuel, and oil consumption
rates and length of operation could not be obtained as was the
estimates on repair and maintenance. In the absence of any recent
data, costs of water and plowing were projected from a 1972 source.

4 it was

In a project appraisal report for irrigated rice,
estimated that the annual cost of the pumps, spares, and repairs
and fuel will be 042.00/acre. At an estimated annual general infla-
tion rate of 19%,5 this cost is equivalent to 0239.00 acre (or
0590.00/ha) in 1982. This cost is about 139% above the current (~
water charges. It is, therefore, assumed that plowing costs would
also have increased by 139% to 035.85/acre (or 088.54/ha). Because
pumping machines are said to operate about twice as long in the
dry season as in the wet season, the irrigation water costs were
adjusted to reflect this proportion. With these assumptions, the
following costs were used in the economic analysis--cost of irriga-
tion water and plowing in the dry season was 0393.33 and 044.77 per

hectare and for the wet season it was 0196.67 and 044.77 per hectare,

respectively.

 

4IBRD/IDA, "Appraisal of an Agricultural Development Project--
The Gambia," 1972. The charges were such that farmers were to pay
the full costs of the equipment.

5Derived from "Central Bank of The Gambia Bulletin, Quarterly
Reports 1975 and 1982. Consumer Price Indices.“ The cost of fuel
and light is estimated to have increased by 26% annually.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

130

Overhead Costs

 

Overhead costs, such as depreciation, are difficult to allo-
cate or apportion to individual crop enterprises. The overhead costs
involved in rice cultivation and which are considered here are
related to depreciation of ox-drawn equipment and draft animals
which, if used at all, are employed in transporting output from the
field to the village.

Farmers who don't own these facilities can often rent these
inputs for about 03.00 per trip of about three hours. To estimate
the cost of depreciation in the financial analysis, a joint cost
allocation method was employed. The average depreciation for draft
animals and ox-drawn equipment per farm was estimated at 033.00.

The average time input of draft-animal-ox-equipment combination was
estimated at 50 hours. Thus the hourly depreciation was estimated
by dividing the annual depreciation by the annual number of hours
worked. This was equal to 00.66 per hour and was used in the finan-
cial analysis. In the economic analysis the average rent per hour
was used to value depreciation. It was assumed that the rent value
was a better approximation of the economic user cost of the draft

animals and equipment.

Output Valuation

 

Output here refers to the quantity of produce reaching home
and before storage. It does not refer to the potential yield which
can be substantially higher if post-harvest losses are not taken into

consideration. For example, Kamuanga (1982) reports that post-harvest

 

 

 

 

 

131

losses in Mali averaged about 21% of the potential yield. In the
financial analysis, the producer price of paddy guaranteed by the
government was used to value the output. This price is 00.51 per
kilogram of paddy.

In the economic analysis the conventional project analysis
approach of valuing tradable goods was employed. This method is justi—
fied-by the fact that The Gambia imports more than half of her domes—
tic rice consumption. The method of calculating the import parity
price of paddy is shown on Table 4.1. The economic value of paddy is
estimated at about 0340.00 per metric ton. This price is used in
the economic analysis.

As an alternative to using the import parity price, another
method, emphasizing the policy objectives of the government, can be
employed. This method was used by Franzel (1979) in estimating the
economic value of irrigated rice in Senegal. The method is based
on the premise that since the government is pursuing a policy of
rice self-sufficiency, it values an additional ton of locally pro-
duced rice at a higher price than a ton of the imported rice. Using
this approach, the guaranteed producer price of 0510.00 per ton is
used as a base. From this base, the estimated cost of milling,
transportation, and storage are deducted as done in the import parity
price calculation. The estimated economic price based on government
policy is then calculated as 0447.00 per ton. This price is about
31.5% higher than the import parity price. In the economic analysis

the net economic benefit will be derived by using the import parity

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

132

TABLE 4.1.--Import Parity Price of Paddy

 

CIF Banjul in $/MTa 272.00
CIF Banjul in D/MTb 598.40
Plus storage 12.00
Wholesale cost of imported rice in D/MT 610.40
Value of paddye 402.86
Minus milling costC 30.00
Minus transportationd 25.00
Minus storage 8.00
Import parity price in D/MT 339.86

 

aEstimated cost in 1981/82. Personal communication with
Dr. R. Kagbo WAROA Subregional Coordinator, Banjul.

bOfficial exchange rate in May 1982. $1 = 02.20. Assumed to
be equal to the shadow exchange rate.

CEstimated by officials at the GPMB owned rice mills in Kaur.

dQuotations from truck drivers in Serre Kunda. Estimate
from Banjul to Georgetown.

eAssumes a 66% recovery rate.

 

 

 

133

price. The government policy oreinted method will only be used for

comparative purposes.

Financial Analysis of the Rice Production Systems

 

In order to estimate the costs and returns of the different
rice production systems, survey data were employed to derive enter-
prise budgets for each of the systems. Sufficient details are
included in the budgets to show both the physical amounts and the
financial value of each input or output and to make possible the
calculations of financial returns to selected factors of production.
It should be borne in mind that the input/output coefficients derived
in Chapter III and which are employed in this chapter reflect the
pattern of use of resources in The Gambia during the 1981/82 survey.
As such they may vary considerably from data collected in other
years. The rice enterprise budgets per hectare are shown in Tables
4.2 to 4.6.

Comparison of Financial
Costs and Benefits

Value of production.--The value of output was highest for the

 

dry season irrigated rice and lowest for the upland rice. Since all
output was valued at the same price of 00.51 per kilogram, the
differences in value are purely a reflection of the differences in
yield per hectare. The value of output was 0676.26, 0932.28, 0958.80,
01,411.17, and 01,238.79 per hectare for upland rice, bafarg rice,

mangrove rice, dry and wet season irrigated rice, respectively.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

134

TABLE 4.2.-—Upland Rice Enterprise Budget per Hectare

 

Amount

Price/Unit
(Dalasis)

Value
(Dalasis)

 

Enterprise Characteristics

1.
2.

No. of Households
Average Holdings

B. Income and Expenditure

1.
2.

boo

mm

10.

Value of Output

Variable Costs

Seed

Fertilizer

Nonfamily Labor
Contract Labor

Plowing

Irrigation

Hired ox-equipment

Total Variable Costs

Gross Margin

Fixed Expenses

Strange Farmer
Depreciation

Returns to land, family
labor,capital and
Management

Opportunity cost of
Capital (15%)b

Net returns to land,
family

Labor and Management
Opportunity cost of land
Net return to family
Labor and Management
Return per workday

to family labor and
management

14
0.20 Ha

1326 Kgs.

46 Kgs

1.6 Wd

027.92

1 ha

251.7

676.26
23.92

4.00

25.92
648.34

2.40
645.94
4.19
641.75
0.00

641.75

2.55

 

Source:

aSemi—permanent labor.
provided even if there is no work to be done.

Survey Data

Once

 

accepted food and lodging is

15% is the interest rate charged by cooperatives to farmers.

...—......

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

135

TABLE 4.3.-—Bafaro Rice Enterprise Budget per Hectare

 

 

 

 

 

 

Price/Unit Value
Amount (Dalasis) (Dalasis)
A. Enterprise Characteristics
1. No. of Households 31 -- --
2. Average Holdings 0.50 Ha -- --
B. Income and Expenditure
1. Value of output 1828 Kgs 0.51 932.28
2. Variable Costs
Seed 50 Kgs 0.53 26.50
Fertilizer -- -- --
Nonfamily Labor
Contract Labor 7.4 Wd 2.87 21.24
Plowing -- -— ~-
Irrigation -- -- --
Hired ox-equipment 3 hours 1.00 3.00
Total Variable Costs -- -- 50.74
3. Gross Margin -- -- 881.54
4. Fixed Expenses
Strange Farmer 15.8 Wd 4.80 75.84
Depreciation -- -- --
5. Returns to land, family
labor,capital and
Management -- —- 805.70
6. Opportunity Cost of
Capital (15%)b 050.74 -- 7.61
7. Net returns to land,
family labor and
management -- -- 798.09
8. Opportunity cost of land 1.0 ha 0.00 ' 0.00
9. Net return to family
labor and management -- —- 798.09
10. Return per workday
to family labor and
management 337 9 Nd -- 2.36
Source: Survey Data

aSemi-permanent labor.

b

 

Once accepted food and lodging is
provided even if there is no work to be done.

15% is the interest rate charged by c00peratives to farmers.

136

TABLE 4.4.--Mangrove Rice Enterprise Budget per Hectare

 

Price/Unit Value

 

Amount (Dalasis) (Dalasis)
A. Enterprise Characteristics
1. No. of Households 26 -- --
2. Average Holdings 0.68 Ha. -- --
B. Income and Expenditure
1. Value of output 1880 Kgs. 0.51 958.80
2. Variable Costs
Seed 46 Kgs 0.56 25.76
Fertilizer -- -- --
Nonfamily Labor
Contract Labor 3.2 Wd 2.74 8.77
Plowing
Irrigation
Hired Ox-equipment 4 hours 1.00 4.00
Total Variable Cost -— -— 38.53
Gross Margin -— -— 920.27

bu.)

Fixed Expenses

Strange Farmera

Depreciation 8 hours 0.66 5.28
5. Returns to land,
family labor, capital

and Management -- —- 914.32
6. Opportunity cost of
capital (15%)b 038.53 -- 5.78

7. Net returns to land,
family labor and

management -- -- 908.54
8. Opportunity cost of land 1.0 ha 0.00 0.00
9. Net return to family labor

and management -- -- 908.54
10. Return per workday to

family labor and

management 322.8 Wd -— 2.81

 

Source: Survey Data

aSemi-permanent labor. Once accepted food and lodging is
provided even if there is no work to be done.

b15% is the interest rate charged by cooperative to farmers

 

137

TABLE 4.5.--Dry Season Irrigated Rice Enterprise Budget per Hectare

 

Price/Unit Value

 

Amount (Dalasis) (Dalasis)
A. Enterprise Characteristics
1. No. of Households 25 -- ~—
2. Average Holdings 0.17 Ha -- --
B. Income and Expenditure
1. Value of Output 2767 Kgs. 0.51 1411.17
2. Variable Costs
Seed 77 Kgs 0.55 42.35
Fertilizer 14 Kgs. 0.81 - 2.52
Nonfamily Labor
Contract labor 14.8 Wd 3.86 57.13
Plowing 1.0 Ha 37.07 37.07
Irrigation 1.0 Ha 247.00 247.00
Hired ox-equipment
Total Variable Costs -- -- 386.07
3. Gross Margin —- —- 1025.10
4. Fixed Expenses
Strange Farmera 20.6 we 4.80 98.88
Depreciation —— —- 0.00
5. Returns to land, family
labor,capital and
management -- —- 926.22
6. Opportunity cost of
capital (15%)b 0386.07 -- 57.91
7. Net returns to land,
family labor and
management 868.31
8. Opportunity cost of land 1.0 ha 400.00 400.00
9. Net return to family
labor and management -— -- 468.31
10. Return per workday to
family labor and
management 295.6 Wd -- 1.58

 

Source: Survey data

aSemi-permanent labor. Once accepted, food and lodging has to
be provided even if there is no work to be done.

b15% is the interest rate charged by c00peratives to farmers.

 

 

 

138

TABLE 4.6.--Wet Season Irrigated Rice Enterprise Budget per Hectare

 

Price/Unit Value

 

Amount (Dalasis) (Dalasis)
A. Enterprise Characteristics
1. No. of Households 23 -- --
2. Average Holdings 0.30 Ha -- --
8. Income and Expenditure
1. Value of Output 2429 Kgs 0.51 1238.79
2. Variable Costs
Seed 95 Kgs 0.57 54.15
Fertilizer ' 25 Kgs 0.18 4.50
Nonfamily labor
Contract labor 5.0 Wd 3.50 17.50
Plowing 1.0 Ha 37.07 37.07
Irrigation 1.0 Ha 247.00 247.00
Hired Ox-equipment
Total Variable Costs -- —- 360.22
3. Gross Margin -- -— 878.57
4. Fixed Expenses
Strange Farmera 6.4 we 4.80 30.72
Depreciation -- -- --
5. Returns to land, family
labor, capital and
management -- -- 847.85
6. Opportunity cost of
capital (15%)b 0360.22 -— 54.03
7. Net returns to land,
family labor and
management -- -- 793.82
8. Opportunity cost of land 1.0 ha 400.00 400.00
9. Net return to family labor
and management -— —— 393.82
10. Return per workday
to family labor and
management 312.7 Wd -— 1.26

 

Source: Survey data
aSemi-permanent labor. Once accepted, food and lodging is
provided even if there is no work to be done.

b15% is the interest rate charged by cooperatives to the farmers.

 

 

 

 

139

Variable costs --There were substantial differences in total

 

variable costs between the rice systems. This reflects differences
in the amounts of any given7variable used, in the enterprise costs

of these variables, and in the composition of the costs. The irri-
gated rice enterprises generally had a substantially higher total
variable cost than the rest of the rice enterprises. This was mainly
due to the costs of irrigation water and plowing which accounted for
73.6% and 79.8% of the total variable costs in the dry and wet season
crops, respectively. In the nonirrigated rice enterprises, seed
costs accounted for more than 50% of the total variable costs, but
less than 15% in the irrigated rice enterprises.

The total variable costs were 027.92,-050.74, 038.53, 0386.07,
and 0360.22 for upland rice, bgiarg rice, mangrove rice, dry and wet
season irrigated rice, respectively. Contract labor accounted for
14.3%, 41.9%, 22.8%, 14.8%, and 4.9% of the total variable costs,
respectively.

The operating ratios, which relate variable costs to gross

income,6

were 0.04, 0.05, 0.04, 0.27, and 0.29 for the upland rice,
_bgfarg rice, mangrove rice, dry and wet season irrigated rice,
respectively. These ratios show, for example, that in upland rice
cultivation, operating expenses amounted to 00.04 per dalasis of

gross income and in wet season irrigated rice cultivation operating

expenses amounted to 00.29 per dalasis of gross income.

 

6Gross income is equal to the value of output.

 

 

 

 

140

Fixed expenses.--Fixed expenses include estimated costs of

 

the strange farmer and depreciation. The cost per workday for the
strange farmer was imputed from an estimate of the value of food and
lodging, and the average number of mandays worked per strange farmer.
Similarly, cost of depreciation attributable to each enterprise was
estimated from the average annual depreciation per farm and the aver-
age number of hours worked by each animal ox—equipment combination.
The total fixed expenses were estimated as follows: 02.40
for upland rice, 075.84 for bafarg rice, 05.28 for mangrove rice,
098.88 for dry season irrigated rice, and 030.72 for wet season
irrigated rice. The fixed ratios which relate fixed expenses to
gross income were less than 0.00, 0.08, 0.01, 0.07, and 0.02 for
upland rice, bgfarg rice, mangrove rice, dry and wet season irrigated
rice, respectively. This means that fixed expenses amounted to no
more than 00.08 per dalasis of gross income in all the rice enter-
prises. These low ratios reflect the low level of fixed investments

in rice production.

Net enterprise income.--Net enterprise income is the value of

 

output or gross income less total costs, where total costs is the sum
of the total variable costs and the total fixed costs. Net enter—
prise income represents the reward to land, family labor, operating
capital, and management for the period covered by the survey. The
total costs of producing a hectare of rice were estimated at 030.32
for upland rice, 0126.58 for bgfgrg_rice, 043.81 for mangrove rice,

0484.95 for dry season irrigated rice, and 0390.94 for wet season

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

141

irrigated rice. The net enterprise income was highest for dry season
irrigated rice and lowest for upland rice which were estimated at
0926.22 and 0645.94 per hectare, respectively. Net enterprise income
for bgfgrg, mangrove rice, and wet season irrigated rice were 0805.70,
0914.32, and 0847.85, respectively.

The net enterprise income is probably the most important
return factor that is of interest to the individual farmers. It
represents the net contribution of an enterprise to the net farm
income. Farmers are not so much interested in the returns of an

enterprise to the individual factors of production. This is because

 

of the traditional social pressure on the more able and prosperous
individuals in a community to share their income with the less able

relatives or neighbors. Higher total incomes, even with lower returns

 

to the indivdiual factors of production may enable the farmers to

meet these traditional obligations.

Return to family labor and management.--Returns to family labor

 

and management are derived from net enterprise income by deducting
an Opportunity cost for operating capital and land. In this analysis,

the opportunity cost of operating capital was assumed to be 15%.7

 

7This is the interest rate charged by the cooperatives for
subsistence loans to the farmers on an annual basis. In actual
fact, operating capital is tied up in rice farming for a period of
about six to eight months in the year. If farmers were to borrow
operating capital at an annual rate of 15% but forced to pay in
six months, say soon after harvest, the actual interest rate would
be 30% per annum. In the absence of production credit on which to
base interest rates, the interest rate for subsistence credit is
used here.

 

 

142

The opportunity costs of land for upland rice, bgfgrg, and mangrove
rice are assumed to be zero.

The Opportunity cost for irrigated rhualand was assumed to
be 0400.00 per hectare based on an estimate of income foregone from
rent. Taking these opportunity costs into account, the returns to
family labor and management were estimated as 0641.75, 0798.09,
0908.54, 0468.31, and 0392.82 for upland rice, bgfgrg_rice, mangrove
rice, dry and wet season irrigated rice, respectively. The low
returns to family labor and management in irrigated rice are mainly
due to the high opportunity costs of land.

The net returns to family labor and management per workday
of family labor can be compared to the enterprise wage rates
received by contract labor. The enterprise wage rates were estimated
at 02.50, 02.74, 03.86, and 03.50 for upland rice,_bafarg rice,
mangrove rice, dry and wet season irrigated rice, respectively.

This compares to the returns to family labor and management per work-
day of family labor of 02.55, 02.36, 02.81, 01.58, and 01.26, respec-
tively. Only in upland rice and mangrove rice was the return to
family labor and management per workday of family labor higher than
the enterprise wage rate. In the irrigated rice crops, the enterprise
wage rates were about two times higher than the return to family

labor and management per workday of family labor. If the assumptions
made in this analysis are true, then farmers engaged in the cultiva-
tion of rice, except for upland and mangrove rice, will have a finan—

cial advantage by seeking wage employment in other farmer's rice

farms.

 

 

 

 

 

143

To make returns per workday to family labor and management
equal to the enterprise wage rate and assuming that other things
remained unchanged, yields per hectare of bafarg rice, dry and wet
season irrigated rice must be increased by at least 337 kilograms,
1,320 kilograms, and 1,374 kilograms (Kgs), respectively. This means
that total yields per hectare of these crops must be 2,165 kgs,

4,091 kgs, and 3,803 kgs, respectively, for the returns per workday
to family labor and management to equal the enterprise wage rates.
However, the attainment of these yields might require an increase in
total labor input and improvements in cultural practices such as
increased use of fertilizer.

Alternatively, all returns per workday to family labor and
management could be made equal to the enterprise wage rates by increas-
ing the producer price of rice to a minimum of 00.80 per kilogram.
This is the minimum price required to make the returns per workday
to family labor and management of wet season irrigated rice production
equal to the enterprise wage rate. This will require a close to 57%
increase in the current producer price. Experience in West Africa
has shown that such drastic increases in the price of a staple commod-

8 Thus, improvements in cultural

ity are politically impracticable.
practices with a view to increasing the productivity of labor might

be the only feasible alternative to improving the returns to family

 

 

8Political unrest in Liberia in 1980 and labor union dis-
turbances in Sierra Leone in 1982 could all be traced back to high
consumer prices of rice. It is too simplistic to view the pricing
of rice as a political will or commitment alone.

 

 

 

 

 

 

144

labor and management. In the long run, however, a combination of

increasing the price of rice received by farmers and improving labor

productivity is needed to maintain a high return in the cultivation

of all types of rice.

Economic Analysis of the Rice Production Systems

 

The purpose of this section is to determine the economic costs
and benefits of each of the rice crop enterprises and to compare the
systems in order to identify rice production systems with high econ-
omic returns. The theoretical framework for this analysis was dis-
cussed in an earlier chapter and the method of valuing the inputs and
outputs was also discussed in earlier sections of this chapter.
Valuing the output at the import parity price and making possible
adjustments for all factor price distortions, the economic costs and
benefits per hectare of the major rice production systems are shown
in Table 4.7. In Table 4.8 the economic costs and benefits per ton
of paddy has been calculated from Table 4.7. In the economic analysis
interest is shifted away from the individual farmer to a considera-
tion of costs and benefits as they affect the nation as a whole.

Thus the necessary question is what are the costs and benefits of
producing a certain quantity, in this case one ton of paddy domes-

tically.

A Comparison of the Economic Costs

 

and Benefits in Rice Production

 

The economic cost of producing one ton of rice domestically

was highest in the dry season irrigated rice and lowest in mangrove

 

 

 

 

 

145

 

 

.00000 000000 000000 000 00 vm:_0>m
.mpmoo 0000000> 00000 0:0 0o 0m0 00 0000000mm0
.0000; 0003 00000
000500 0000500000 000005 0000 000000 005 0000 .0000 mam; mmwgagmpcm 050 um vm:_m>o
.0000000300 030001x0\_0e0cm 00:30 00 000000000000 000000000
.0000 000000 0:» 00 00:00>0
.0000 zw>00m ”mogzom

 

 

00.0000- 00.0000- 00.000- 00.000- 00.000- 0000 000000: 000
0000000 oweocoum 002 .w
00.0000 00.0000 00.000 00.0000 00.000 0000 00000 00000000 00000 .0
00.0000 00.0000 00.000 00.000 00.000 0000 000000 000000
mo 0000 0000000o000 .0
00.000 00.000 00.0 00.0 00.0 0000 0000 00 0000 00000000000 .0
-1 .. oo.w .. .. 0;\o 0000000000000 .0
00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 0000 000000 0000000 .0
00000 00x00 .0
00.00 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 0000 @0000000 000000000
0 0 0000 0000000000 .m
-- -- 00.0 0.0 -- 0000 0000000000-x0 00000 .0
00.000 00.000 -- -- -- 0000 0000000000 .0
00.00 00.00 i- -- -- 0000 0000000 .0
00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 0000 000000 00000000 .0
00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 0000 0000000000 .0
00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 0000 000000 .0
. . 00000 0000000> .N
00 000 00 000 00.000 00.000 00.000 0000 0000000 00 00000 .0
003 000
m>ogmc0z 000000 0000 0:000: 00::

 

0000 000000000

000000: 000 000000 000 :0 0000000000 000m 00 00000000 000 00000 00Eocoom--.0.0 m0m<0

 

 

 

000500 0000500000 000000 5000 000000 005 0000

.00000 000000 000050 000 00 003—0>0
.00000 0000000> 00000 000 we 0m0 00 000050000

U

a

00.000 000.0000 0000. 0000030000
.00500 00 00000 000 00 0:00> 0000 m00vw>00 00 0.0 00000 5000 00>000o

.0000; 0mm; 00000
.0000 0003 0000000000 000 00 um:_0>o

.000000000 030001x00002000 00020 mo 000000000000 00030000

 

146

 

 

0000000
m0.m001 00.0001 mm.mm01 mm.m001 00.0001 co00o :00 000
0000000 00000000 002 .m
mm.mw0 00.000 mm.mm0 00.000 mm.oom 00000 00000 00500000 00000 .0
00.000 00.000 00.000 00.0mm 00.000 cou\o 00000 000000
00 0000 0000:00o000 .0
00.000 00.000 00.0 00.0 00.0 00000 0000 00 0000 00003000000 .0
11 11 00.0 11 11 00003 000000000000 .0
00.00 m0.mm 00.0 00.00 00.0 :000o 005000 0000000 .0
00000 00x00 .0
00.00 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00000 0000000 000000000
mo 0000 00000000000 .0
mm.om 11 m0.m 00.0 11 00000 0000000001xo 0000: .0
0m.ow m0.m00 11 11 11 :000o co0pmm0000 .0
m0.w0 m0.00 11 11 11 0000a @003000 .0 .
00.0 00.0N 00.0 00.00 No.m 00000 00000 00000000 .0
00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00000 0000000000 .0
00.00 00.00 O0.m0 00.00 00.00 0000a 0000 .0
00000 0000000> .0
00.000 oo.o0m oo.o0m 00.000 00.000 0000a 000000 00 0:00> .0
002 000 111111
0>MWWM02 000000 0000 00000: 000:

0000 000000000

 

 

00050w 000 :0 00000 00

000 0:0 0000:0000 mo 00000000 000 00000 0000000011.w.0 m0m<0

 

 

 

147

rice cultivation with total costs estimated at 0819.44 and 0498.29,
respectively. The costs in upland rice, bafarg rice, and wet
season irrigated rice were 0500.58, 0603.92, and 0782.93 per ton,
respectively. The economic costs in irrigated rice cultivation were
generally higher than those of the other rice production systems.

Total labor, including the costs of strange farmers, contract
labor and the opportunity cost of family labor accounted for more
than half of the economic costs in all the rice producing systems.
Labor costs contributed about 95.8%, 96.5%, 95.4%, 57.2%, and 60.1%
of the total costs per ton in upland rice, bafarg rice, mangrove
rice, dry and wet season irrigated rice, respectively. The opportu-
nity cost of land was responsible for 17.6% and 21.0% of the dry and
wet season irrigated crops' economic costs, respectively, while
plowing and irrigation costs accounted for 19.3% and 12.7% of the
costs, respectively.

Using the import parity price to value the output, all sys-
tems of rice production showed a negative economic benefit with the
highest economic loss coming from the dry season irrigated rice
and the lowest coming from mangrove rice. If the assumptions made
in valuing the inputs and outputs hold and if the input and output
coefficients derived in this study are correct, then The Gambia has
a comparative disadvantage in rice production. This means that the
nation as a whole is better off by importing rice and shifting the
resources currently engaged in rice production to other enterprises

where the country enjoys a comparative advantage. This is true even

 

 

 

 

148

when output is valued at the government policy oreinted price of
0447.00 per ton.

If output is valued at 0340.00 per ton, net economic losses
amount to 0160.58, 0263.92, 0158.28, 0479.44, and 0442.93 per ton in
upland rice, bafarg, mangrove rice, dry and wet season irrigated
rice, reSpectively. If output is valued at 0447.00 per ton the
corresponding economic losses are 053.58, 0156.92, 051.28, 0372.44,
and 0335.95, respectively.

Assuming that output is valued at the import parity price as
estimated in this study, the output per hectare required to make net
economic returns per ton at least equal to zero can be estimated.
This is done by dividing the total economic costs per hectare by the
import parity price. The results are shown in Table 4.9. At the
minimum yields of 1,953 kgs, 3,247 kgs, 2,755 kgs, 6,669 kgs, and

9 for upland rice, bafaro rice, mangrove rice,

5,594 kgs per hectare
dry and wet season irrigated rice, respectively, can be required for
economic benefits per ton of paddy to be equal to zero. These yields
are 47.3%, 77.6%, 46.5%, 141.0%, and 130.3% higher than the observed
yields, respectively. Unless there is a technological change, these
increased outputs are difficult to achieve without a correSponding
increase in the use of inputs.

The results of Table 4.9 show that only upland rice and

mangrove rice have required yields that lie within one standard

 

9These assume that production costs remain unchanged. In
actual fact, increases in output are likely to increase production
costs through increased use of inputs unless such increases in
output are the results of a technological change.

 

 

149

 

.cmmcmsoc: cwmsms mpmoo gmspo pas» mozzmmm mwce
.cOp Lon mowsa xpwgma “some? msp An mumpom; emu mcgzpms uvsocoum Pmuop msp m:?vw>wu An um>FLmo
.osmN on szom “mam? pm cog can mcszpms oesocoom pm: mxmen5.vwvmmc mgmpum; Log mvpmw> .

u
.n—mwa came mg» op
Amarav vmcvm Lo Eogm Am32wev napomgpnzm mum mcowpmw>mu cgmvcwgm 03p 4? vpmvx wmmgw>m mzogmo

.urmvz some msp
op Am:_av umnom to scam Amzcwsv wwwomgpmnsw m? cowpmw>mv vgwccmpm ace 4? vpovz momsm>m mzosma

.u_mwx.cmwe mcp mo mmmpcmogma m mm cowpmw>mv csmvcmpm 65p mommmgaxm cowpmvsm> +0 pcmvovmwmoum

mono >m>c=m ”mugsom

 

 

 

QQmm ammm woe- mqwm oHoH m.wm mmem auam umpmmsaaH
commmm p63
memo Hmmm 5N4- some ONHH N.Nm Noam mafia camewaLH
commmm xso
mmkm omam om - wmmw mmm 0.5m owws wave w>oemcaz
memm mmem om - NmNN dam N.Nm wmwfl 680m ceaaem
mmofi Neom 0mm- ewfim woe “.40 mmmfl wowm u:e_az
iii mzra mscwz mar; mzcvz

Ammxv a_aw>

cowumwgm> to Amxv
mnmswscmm

mpcawuwtcmou u_aa>

 

occupaw>mo eaaucaam N ncowpaa>ao eaaucapm H

 

ogmN ou szcm :04 awn mcgspmm owsocoom pmz mxm: Op nmgwscwm pzapzo mo :omwsmaeou--.m.¢ m4m<e

 

 

 

150

deviation of the observed mean yields. Even at two standard devia-
tions, the required yields for irrigated rice are still out of range.
Under good management practices, yields are estimated to vary from
1,500 kgs to 2,500 kgs per hectare for bafarg_and mangrove rice and
between 3,000 to 5,500 kgs per hectare for irrigated rice.10 All
this points to the difficulty of making irrigated rice cultivation
economically profitable from the national point of view.

Given that The Gambian government is committed to achieving

rice self—sufficiency at some time in the fUture,the results show

 

that only mangrove rice and upland rice and to a limited extent
bafaro rice cultivation systems offer any hope for optimism from

the national point of view. Through improved cultural practices and

 

adoption of technology that will improve labor productivity, it is
possible to make these three systems of rice cultivation economically
profitable.

The above analyses are based on the valuation of family labor
at the enterprise wage rate which is an estimate of wages paid to
hired labor irrespective of the task done. However, in economic
analysis, the appropriate price of labor to use is the one that
reflects the opportunity cost of labor, which is determined by the
marginal value product of labor. This, however, is difficult to
estimate.

Several economists agree that in developing countries the

marginal value product of labor employed in agriculture is positive

 

10Department of Agriculture, The Gambia, ”Rice Cultivation in
The Gambia, Extension Workers Handbook,” October 1977.

 

 

 

 

L—

 

 

 

151

but very close to Zero. If this is true in The Gambia, then valuing
family labor at zero opportunity cost will alter the above analysis
and conclusions. For purposes of comparison and to show the sensi-
tivity of the above conclusions on the method used in valuing family
labor, two different prices are used. The first values family labor
at zero opportunity costs and the second values family labor at half
the enterprise wage rate used above. The results are shown in Table
4.10.

At zero opportunity cost, only dry season irrigated rice
showed a negative net economic return. The wet season irrigated rice
net economic return, although positive, was very low and estimated
at 07.65 per ton of paddy.

When family labor was valued at half the enterprise wage
rate, the results showed negative net economic benefits for the two
irrigated rice systems. The net economic benefits of the other
three systems were all positive. However, the net economic returns
per ton of paddy for bafarg_rice was very low.

These results tend to support the skepticism expressed about
irrigated rice when family labor was valued at the enterprise wage
rate. Subsequent discussions on the rice enterprises, therefore,

will be based on the results obtained when family labor was valued

at the enterprise wage rate.

 

 

 

 

 

 

152

TABLE 4.10.--Economic Costs and Benefits per Ton of Paddy with
Family Labor Valued at Different Rates

Zero Opportunity Cost

Half Enterprise Hage Rate

 

 

Costs Net Benefits Costs Net Benefits

Upland Rice 26.03 313.97 263.31 76.69
Bafaro Rice 73.41 266.59 338.65 1.35
Mangrove Rice 27.82 312.18 263.05 76.95
Dry Season

Irrigated Rice 407.07 -67.07 613.26 -273.26
Wet Season

Irrigated Rice 332.35 7.65 557.64 -217.64

 

 

 

 

 

 

153

Financial and Economic Analysis of Groundnut
and Upland Cereals

 

 

Input Valuation

 

The valuation of all the inputs used in the financial and
economic analysis of groundnuts and upland cereals is similar to
that adopted in the rice enterprises with only one exception. In
the upland cereals, the cost of seed for both the financial and
economic analysis is an average of the farmers‘ subjective valuation

and does not represent market prices.

Output Valuation

 

In the financial analysis the guaranteed producer price was

used to value the output of groundnut and maize. These were the only

 

two upland crops that'had official prices. For the rest of the

 

cereals the price per kilogram was assumed to be equal to that of
maize. In the economic analysis the export parity price as estimated
in Table 4.11 was used to value the output of groundnuts. Since
there is very little, if any, external trade on upland cereals, the
economic price was estimated at the financial price less an estimate
for transportation to the market. This transportation cost was esti-
mated at 00.025 per kilogram.11

Comparison of Financial
Costs and Benefits

 

 

Enterprise budgets were prepared to estimate the financial

costs and benefits of each of the upland crops. These budgets are

 

11It was assumed that transportation cost of upland cereals
was similar to that of rice.

 

 

—+___

 

154

TABLE 4.11.--Export Parity Price for Groundnuta

 

 

F.0 B. Banjul in $/MTb $ 461.80
F.O.B. Banjul in 0.MTC $ 1015.97
Minus Transportationd 35.00
Minus storagee 12.00
Minus lossesd 101.60
Export parity price 867.36
aUndecorticated.
b

Free-on-Board (FOB) price in 1981/82

COfficial exchange rate in May 1982. $1 = 02.20. Assumed
to be equal to the shadow exchange rate.

dEstimate of transport and storage costs by GPMB officials.

eEstimated 10% loss from farmer to time of shipment.

155

shown in Tables 4.12 to 4.16. Like the rice enterprises, the esti-
mates in these budgets are based on coefficients derived in Chapter
III and refer to production practices at the time that the data were

collected.

Value of production.--The value of total output per hectare

 

was highest for groundnut and lowest for early (sung) millet. The
differences in value reflect both a difference in yields per hectare
and a difference in price per kilogram. The total value of the
groUndnut output per hectare was 0858.50 and the values of maize,
sorghum, early (sung) and late (sagyg) millet were 0496.37, 0433.16,

0405.23, and 0470.89 per hectare, respectively.

Variable costs.--Total variable costs were estimated at

 

057.77, 024.12, 014.32, 08.11, and 025.97 per hectare of groundnut,
maize, sorghum, early (sung) and late (sanyg) millet, respectively.
The value of seed made up about 79.0%, 76.6%, 83.8%, 75.5%, and
62.8% of the total variable costs, respectively. The only other
input with relatively high contribution to the variable costs was
contract labor which contributed no less than 10% of the total
variable costs in any of the crops.

The operating ratios were estimated at 0.07, 0.05, 0.03,

0.02, and 0.06 for groundnut, maize, sorghum, early (suno) and late

millet (sanyo), respectively. This means that operating expenses

amounted to no more than 00.07 per dalasis of gross income.

156

 

 

 

 

 

aSemi-permanent labor.

TABLE 4-12.--Groundnut Enterprise Budget per Hectare
Price/Unit Value
Amount (Dalasis) (Dalasis)
A. Enterprise Characteristics
1. No.of Households 73 -- -_
2. Average Holdings 0.92 Ha -- --
B. Income and Expenditure
1. Value of Output 1717 Kgs. 0.50 858.5
2. Variable Costs
Seed 83 Kgs. 0.55 45.65
Fertilizer 28 Kgs. 0.18 5.04
Nonfamily Labor
Contract Labor 2.0 Nd 3.04 6.08
Hired ox-equipment 1 hr. 1.00 1.00
Total Variable Cost -- -- --
3. Gross Margin -- -- 800.73
4. Fixed Costs
Strange Farmer 5.4 wd 4.80 25.92
Depreciation 36 hrs 0.66 23.76
5. Returns to land, family
labor, capital and
management -- -- 751.05
6. Opportunity cost of
capital (16%)b 057.77 -- 8.67
7. Net returns to land,
family labor and
management -- -- 742.38
8. Opportunity cost of land 1.0 ha 0.00 0.0
9. Net return to family
labor and management -- -- 742.38
10. Return per workday to
family labor and
management 111.5 Nd 6.66
Source: Survey data

Once accepted food and lodging is
provided even if there is no work to be done.

b15% is the interest:rate charged by cooperatives to farmers.

157

TABLE 4.13.--Maize Enterprise Budget per Hectare

 

Price/Unit Value

 

Amount (Dalasis) (Dalasis)
A. Enterprise Characteristics
1. No. of Households 52 -- --
2. Average holdings 0.23 ha —- -_
B. Income and Expenditure
1. Value of output 1013 Kgs 0.49 496.37
2. Variable Costs
Seed 33 Kgs. 0.56 18.48
Fertilizer 2 Kgs 0.18 0.36
Nonfamily labor
Contract labor 1.6 Nd 2.05 3.28
Hired ox-equipment 2 hrs. 1.00 2.00
Total Variable Cost -- -- 24.12
3. Gross Margin -- -- 472.25
4. Fixed Costs
Strange Farmera 5.8 wa 4.80 27.84
Depreciation 34 hrs. 0.66 22.44
5. Returns to land, family
labor capital and
management —- -- 421.97
6. Opportunity Cost of
Capital (15%)b 024.12 -- 3.62
7. Net returns to land,
family labor and
management -- -- 418-35
8. Opportunity cost of land 1.0 ha 0.00 0.00
9. Net return to family
labor and management -- -- 418.35
10. Return per workday to
family labor and 108.8 3.85

management

 

Source: Survey data.
aSemi—permanent labor. Once accepted, food and lodging is
provided even if there is no work to be done.

b15% is the interest rate charged by cooperatives to farmers.

158

TABLE 4.14.--Sorghum Enterprise Budget per Hectare

 

 

management

Price/Unit Value
Amount (Dalasis) (Dalasis)
A. Enterprise Characteristics
1. No. of Households 28 -- --
2. Average Holdings 0.39 ha -- -_
B. Income and Expenditure
1. Value of output 884 Kgs. 0.49 433.16
2. Variable costs
Seed 24 Kgs. O 50 12.00
Fertilizer 2 Kgs O 18 0.36
Nonfamily Labor
Contract labor 0.7 Wd 2.80 1.96
Hired Ox equipment -- -- --
Total Variable Costs -- -- 14.32
3. Gross Margin -- -- 418.84
4. Fixed Expenses
Strange Farmer 10.0 Wd 4.80 48.00
Depreciation 21 hrs. 0.66 13.86
5. Returns to land, family
labor, capital and
management -- -- 356.98
6. Opportunity cost of
capital (15%)b 14.32 -- 2.15
7. Net returns to land
family labor and
management -- -- 354.83
8. Opportunity cost of land 1.0 ha 0.00 0.00
9. Net return to family
labor and management -- -- 354.83
10. Return per workday to
family labor and
80.3 4.42

 

Source: Survey data

aSemi-permanent labor. Once accepted food and lodging is
provided even if there is no work to be done.

b15% is the interest rate charged by cooperatives to farmers.

 

 

159

TABLE 4.15.--Early Millet (suno) Enterprise Budget per Hectare

 

Price/Unit Value

 

Amount (Dalasis) (Dalasis)
A. Enterprise Characteristics
1. No. of Households 34 -- --
2. Average Holdings 0.62 ha —- --
B. Income and Expenditure
1. Value of output 827 Kgs. 0.49 405.23
2. Variable Costs
Seed 12 Kgs. 0.51 6.12
Fertilizer 3 Kgs 0.18 0.54
Nonfamily Labor
Contract Labor 0.5 Nd 2.90 1.45
Hired Ox equipment
Total Variable Costs -- —- 8.11
3. Gross Margins —- -— 397.12
4. Fixed Costs
Strange Farmera 3.8 Nd 4.80 18.24
Depreciation 21 hrs 0.66 13.86
5. Returns to land, family
labor capital and
management -— -- 365.02
6. Opportunity cost of
capital (15%)b 08.11 -- 1.22
7. Net returns to land,
family labor and
management -- -- 363.80
8. Opportunity cost of
land 1 ha. 0.00 0.00
9. Net return to family
labor and management -- -- 363.80
10. Return per workday to
family labor and
management 113,5 Nd -- 3.20

 

Source: Survey data.

aSemi~permanent labor. Once accepted food and lodging is
provided even if there is no work to be done.

b

15% is the interest rate charged by cooperatives to farmers.

 

 

 

160

TABLE 4.16.—-Late Millet (Sanyo) Enterprise Budget per Hectare

 

 

 

 

Price/Unit Value
Amount (Dalasis) (Dalasis)
A. Enterprise Characteristics
1. N0. of Households 17 -- --
2. Average Holdings 0.30 Ha -- --
B. Income and Expenditure
1. Value of output 961 Kgs. 0.49 470.89
2. Variable Costs
Seed 32 Kgs 0.51 16.32
Fertilizer O Kgs 0.81 0.00
Nonfamily labor
Contract labor 2.3 Nd 2.89 6.65
Hired Ox Equipment 3 hrs. 1.00 3.00
Total Variable Costs -- -- --
3. Gross Margins -- -- 444.92
4. Fixed Expenses
Strange Farmer 7.2 st 4.8 34.56
Depreciation 19 hrs. 0.66 12.54
5. Returns to land,
family labor -- -- 397.82
6. Opportunity cost of
capital (15%)b 025 97 -- 3.90
7. Net returns to land
family labor and
management -~ -- 393.92
8. Opportunity cost of land 1 ha 0.00 0.00
9. Net return to family
labor and management -- -- 393.92
10. Return per workday to
family labor and
management 111.1 Nd —- 3.55
Source: Survey Data

aSemi-permanent labor. Once accepted food and lodging is pro—
vided even if there is no work to be done.

b15% is the interest rate charged by c00peratives to farmers.

 

 

161

Fixed expenses.—-Fixed expenses included estimated costs

 

of strange farmer labor and depreciation of fixed capital. These
amounted to 049.68 for groundnuts, 050.28 for maize, 061.86 for
sorghum, 032.10 for early (sung) millet, and 048.10 for late (sanyg)
millet. The corresponding fixed ratios were 0.06, 0.10, 0.14, 0.08,
and 0.10, respectively. The low fixed ratios indicate a low level

of fixed capital investment.

Net enterprise income.--Net enterprise income, which repre—

 

sents the returns to operating capital, land, and family labor and
management was highest for the groundnut enterprise and lowest for
the sorghum enterprise with net enterprise incomes of 0751.05 and
0356.98 per hectare, respectively. Maize, early (sung) and late
(sgnyg) millet had net enterprise incomes of 0421.97, 0365.07, and

0397.82 per hectare, respectively.

Return to family labor and management.--To arrive at the

 

returns to family labor and management, the opportunity cost of,
operating capital was assumed to be 15% and that of land was assumed
to be zero for all the crop enterprises. The highest return to
family labor and management was recorded in the groundnut enterprise
with an estimate of 0742.38 per hectare. This was followed by the
maize enterprise with 0418.35 per hectare, the late (sanyg) millet
enterprise, with 0393.92 per hectare, the early (sung) millet enter-
prise with 0363.80 per hectare and the sorghum enterprise with a

return to family labor and management of 0354.83 per hectare.

 

 

 

162

A comparison of the returns to family labor and management
per workday of family labor and the enterprise wage rate for each
crop show that farmers are financially better off by working on
their upland crops than by taking employment in another farmer's
cr0p. This is because all the enterprise wage rates of 03.04, 02.05,
02.80, 02.90, and 02.89 per workday were lower than the return to
family labor and management per workday of family labor of 06.66,
03.85, 04.42, 03.20, and 03.55 for groundnut, maize, sorghum, early

(suno) and late (sanyo) millet, respectively.

Economic Analysis

 

In this section an estimate of the economic costs and bene—
fits of each of the upland crops is made in order to facilitate a
comparison among the upland crops on the one hand and between the
upland crops and rice crops on the other hand. Table 4.17 summar~
izes the economic costs and benefits of the groundnut and upland
crops per hectare. In Table 4.18 the economic costs and benefits per

hectare are converted to costs and benefits per ton of output.

 

The lowest economic cost per ton was obtained in the ground-
nut cr0p enterprise, while the highest was in the late (saflyg) millet
enterprise. The differences in economic costs were mainly due to
differences in total labor costs which accounted for 74.1%, 81.1%,
88.3%, 89.6%, and 92.0% of the total economic costs per ton in ground—
nut, maize, sorghum, early (sugg) and late (saflyg) millet, respec-
tively. The corresponding total costs per ton were 0291.63, 0309.5,
0352.06, 0420.92, and 0458.38, respectively.

   

 

.200 Log oo.mmm yo cowpmpcoamcmcp mmm
mcm porpws mam? ucm arsmm .Escmsom .mwemz

 

.mcmscmm Op @614 wwwpaazm mam pscnczogm to» mmmm

.mp8; mam: mmwcacmucm msp am um:_w>v
.mpwoo mpnm_gw> Page“ 65p mo &mH um vmpmavummu

a

wuco >m>c=m ”mucsom

_ cop Log omqa co muwcq muznocq vmszmmm asp pm 863F6>
.mowca zuwcmq pcogxm 6;“ pm nmspm> mw wzcncaogwm

 

  

 

 

  
   
     

 

k¢.m om.~4 em.ma mm.NmH mm.mmm .a;\a measbom usaocoom 062 .m
mo.mkm Hm.¢oq NN.HHm mm.mfim mm.oom a;\o mpmou assocoum _epop .N

ms.mmm mo.HNm 4m.emm eo.mmm om.mmm m:\o 616864 >_wEau
Mw . . . +0 pmou zpwcspconao .m
1. mm.mm Wm.o 00.0 ooflo oono a;\o 5:85 co smou.spcczpaoaao .m

5N.ms .mH oo.HN 00 em 00 mm a:\a cowpmwomaama .8

8m em 00 m4 em.mm No.mN e;\o amazed macacpm .8
oe.H . . . . mpmou umx_u .8

co m AN N 5N m we m5 m;\g upepwamo mcwpmcmao

-- oo.m -- . . $0 “moo xp?::ugoaa .
mw- -- i- owim mm WH mgvo pcmaawzcm xo mePI .w m
.H . . . w . .

mm.fi mwim om.H mm.m wo.o w;\o nmmmm U

NH.8 . ms H mH.H 05.83 m; a 1685_ pascpcoo .6

mm as oo.NH w¢.mfi m©.mq mmvm ame_wpama .3

mm.¢mm mm.©¢¢ vmmm .m
©O.HHV mo.Hmv . mpmou w—nmwgm> .N

prmxmme Aocsmv om mwvfi m;\o mpzapso mo w:_m>

_.
1: Pp.z 8064 pwPFWZ z_;mm Escmcom memz pscvcsoco ppc:
wcmpom: Ema mrmwcm

u ucmraz use mpzccczogw mo mopemcwm new mpmo 1111
o owsocoum--.NH.v Mgmqe

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

164

 

.so» oo.mmo 4o sowpopsoomsosp ama—

asa paFFwE apo_ oso Aroma .Eosmsom .anoz

.mpmoo apsawso> _o

.aoos aooz amwsosapsa ass pa oa:_o>o
poo asp so smfi pa oaooewpmmo
.msassaa op aasa anPooom ago pssosoosm soa mmoms

sop Lao ooso 4o aowso aooooso oaazmma asp so oa:_a>
.aovso xpwsoo psooxa asp no oazro> m? pzsosooswa

.wH.m wFQMH EOLk Um>wLmQ anLzom

 

mm.m
wm.mm¢
oo.mmm

oo.o
mm.mm
mo.NN

m©.H

mm.H
mo.m
o¢.m

oo.mo¢

ll.“

onsomv
pwppwz w#ms

  

mo.¢¢
No.0mv
HH.¢mm

00.0
mm.mH
om.mm
mo.¢
NH.m
mm.w

mm.mH
oo.m©¢

Aosomv
pm—sz thwm

cm.mHH
mo.mmm
«m.¢mm

00.0
om.mm
om.¢m

mm.m

om.mmm
om.mom
wH.ONN
00.0
om.mm
w¢.mm
mm.m
mm.H
wm.m
«H.H
vN.wH
oo.mov

mn.mmm
mo.~mm
H¢.mmfl

oo.o
mm.ow
0H.mH

mm.m

mm.o
m¢.oH
om.m
mm.m
mm.om
om.mow

c05\o
soo\o
soo\o

coo\o
coa\o
:05\g

COS\Q

cos\o
c55\o
c05\o
cos\o
Cos\g

mCLJme owEocoom pwz

sob Lao mpmou owsosoom _opop

sosos xrwsos

so omou howsowsoooo

osas so omoo zowsoosoooo
corpowoasoao .s

saEsos amsaspm .a

momou oaxms

UPMowsao metastaso

ao “moo apwszpsoooo
psaeowooaixo oasw: .a
wmwm .U

sosa_ ooospsoo .o
saN?_pras .s
oaam .o

mpmoo aPsavsa>
“gonzo ao azra>

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

165

Net economic returns per ton were 0575.73, 0155.50, 0112.94,

044.08, and 06.62 for groundnut, maize, sorghum, early (suno) millet

If the assumptions made in the above

and late (sanyo), respectively.
analysis are a true reflection of actual conditions and if the esti-

mated coefficients are correct, then the results show that The Gambia

has a comparative advantage in the cultivation of all the upland

crops considered in this study.

Comparison of the Financial and Economic Costs and
Returns of All the Crongnterprises

Table 4.19 is a summary of the financial and economic costs

and returns per ton of all the crop enterprises analyzed in this

study. The results show that except for the irrigated rice crops,
gross margin per ton of output was above 0460.00 for all of the crop

enterprises. Gross margin per ton of the irrigated rice crop was
nearly 0100.00 less than the lowest gross margin of the other crops.

In general, fixed costs are higher in the upland crops than

in the rice crops. This is because all of the inputs included in the
fixed costs-—strange farmer, draft animals, and ox-equipment--are

generally controlled by men and are, therefore, utilized more in

the upland male crops than in the female rice cr0p.
Net return to family labor and management was lowest in the

irrigated rice crops and highest for upland rice and mangrove rice.
The low net returns to family labor and management in irrigated rice

are due to the positive and high opportunity cost of land.

In the economic analysis, the results showed that The Gambia

enjoys a comparative advantage in the cultivation of all of the

 

 

 

1(36

 

 

.a>vuamas ago mamasocasao c? masomwao

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.mH.v aFDap oca .oH.¢ oo -.e .m.o .m.¢ o» N.e mapsah Boga oa>wsao "ausoom
No.8 ao.e¢ em.NHH cm.mmH m~.m~m smm.~e¢v se¢.o~eo so~.omHV s~m.mo~s som.oofiv mscaoam assocoua oaz .x mw
. N
mm.mmo No.o~¢ mo.mmm m.oom mo.~m~ mm.~m~ es.mHm mm.mmv ~m.moo mm.00m mumou uwsocoow page» .o mw
3
oo.mae oo.mm¢ oo.mme oo.mmv om.~om oo.osm oo.oem oo.ovm oo.oam oo.oom uoouoo so aopo> .H
. . . om.m mm.m Nm.o nm.o oe.~ m~.~ No.H usasamasae
mm m Km m co m osa Loso— xpwsaw
ou aaoxgoz Lao cgouam .w
~o.oo¢ oo.omv om.~oe mo.NH¢ ~m.~mo ma.~ofl mm.oo~ nm.mm¢ om.omv nm.mmo psasaoosas osa Lose—
z—vsom o» sszuas uaz .m .8
mm
mo.mH¢ mm.Hv¢ Nm.mo¢ mm.oH¢ ~e.~me mo.o¢m mx.¢mm em.mme m~.o<v m~.va ucasamocaz mm
oco Powwomu Losa— MN
3.2a» 6:3 o» .2253 .m W
No.oo Hm.mm wo.oo mm.o¢ mo.mm mo.- o~.mm Hw.m oe.~e Hm.“ mumou oax_u .o
mm.~ov o~.om¢ om.m~¢ ofi.mov mm.oo¢ o~.Hmm ~¢.okm Hm.om¢ «N.Nme om.mmo mswmcaz mmoso .u
~o.n~ Hm.o o~.oH Hm.m~ mo.mm on.mc~ mm.mmH oa.o~ o~.~m mo.H~ mumou apsmwgo> _auoh .m
oo.ooe oo.omv oo.ooe oo.oo¢ oo.o0m oo.on oo.on oo.o~m oo.on oo osm unsozo yo a:_o> .<
apes spsma am as
Ezsmsom aNPaz us: 3 o ao_s au?m auvm
gap—m: . -osaoso wows oaoamwgsa a>osm=az ocawom compo:

 

oosu so so» can mssouam osa mumou quocoom oca powusasws

as“ so cam_caaeoo--.ms.q asses

 

 

167

upland crops. Net economic returns in all of these craps were posi—
tive. In the cultivation of rice, The Gambia has a comparative dis-
advantage as is reflected in the negative economic returns.

The return per workday to family labor and management is
generally higher on the upland crops than on the rice crops. Given
this difference in returns on family labor, one may wonder why farmers
should continue to produce rice instead of shifting their resources
to the production of upland cereals and groundnut. The answer to this
lies in the sexual division of labor, the subjective value attached
to rice as distinct from the producer price, the desire to minimize
the risk of total crop failure by means of diversification and the
higher total income that the family could get by distributing the
available labor between two or more crops.

As was indicated earlier, labor input in agriculture in The
Gambia is differentiated by sex along crop enterprise lines with
women cultivating the rice crops and men cultivating upland cereals
and groundnut. This division is not necessarily based on returns to
any factor of production but, rather on an inherited tradition and a
paranoia by male farmers on the effect that females economic inde-
pendence will have on the traditional family structure. Thus, women
have been relegated to the production of rice even though returns
per unit of labor may be lower than those obtained on upland crops.

The subjective value of rice to a farming household may be
another reason why farmers continue to grow rice. This subjective

value may be higher than the producer price used in this analysis.

 

 

 

 

 

168

This is supported by the fact that farmers are reluctant to sell
rice to the Gambia Produce Marketing Board at the existing producer
price.

Rice crops and the other upland crops are cultivated on two
differing ecological environments and they have different demands on
moisture. Short dry spells during the growing period of crops may
have different effects on the potential yields of these crops. By
cultivating both upland cereals and rice, farmers avoid the risk
of a total food crop failure.

Another important reason may be related to the fact that
farmers get a higher total income by cultivating both upland crops and
rice, than they would have if all efforts were devoted to upland
crops. This is related to the seasonal demands that the individual
cr0ps have on the available labor. For illustrative purposes,

Figure 4.1 shows the monthly labor profile per hectare for three
crops--mangrove rice, late millet, and groundnut. Except for the
early part of the rainy season when demands on labor for all crops
increase, the figure shows that the rice demand on labor is at a peak
when the demand on labor for the upland crops is at its lowest. Thus,
labor is being used on rice at the time that its return from upland
crops is lowest. Similarly, more labor is used on upland crops when
its return from rice is lowest. With this kind of arrangement, the
total marginal product of labor is higher, at anytime during the

year, than it would have been if labor was devoted to upland cr0ps

alone. This suggests that total income is higher if both rice and

 

 

 

169

....... Mangrove Rice.
———__. Late Millet.
---- Groundnut.
80 r
60 .
cu :3
S.
(U
.1.)
U
$40 .
S.
(I)
O- O
m :
>3 .
(U 0
..U 0
x .
620 r-
3

 

 

 

14.104540110061471-
Months

Figure 4.1.—-Labor Profile per Hectare of Mangrove Rice, Late Millet
and Groundnut.

 

 

170

upland crops are cultivated than if only upland crops were culti-

vated.

Costs and Benefits of Rice Self-Sufficiency

 

The above analysis has shown that the production of rice
domestically to substitute for imported rice is an economic loss to
The Gambia. However, dependence on the outside to satisfy domestic
demand can often by very dangerous. Aspirations for national
integrity and political stability can often override economic consid-
erations and so justify a country's pursuance of a policy of self-
sufficiency in food regardless of the economic costs. These aspira-
tions are not without their costs and so it is informative at this
point to attempt to quantify the costs of such policies.

The Gambia is integrated into the world economy. In the past
the country has had to export groundnuts to earn foreign exchange
which, in turn, is used to import food grains. In this section an
attempt is made to evaluate the economic costs and benefits of sub-
stituting domestically produced rice for imported rice by looking at
different world price ranges for both rice and groundnut. First,
the effect of changes in the world price of rice on the comparative
advantage of domestic rice production is presented. Later, the effect
of achieving rice self-sufficiency on the Gross Domestic Product is
examined.

Table 4.20 shows the changes in net economic returns per
ton of domestically produced paddy with respect to changes in the

world price of rice and more specifically with respect to changes in

 

 

171

.zoopm Nm\pmop sp oa>samso mo soppaoppm psassouo
.a>ppamas aso mamaspsasao sp masompao
.Namp sag :p om.mo u oo.pps
.Aoo.o
\Amoo + aopso xppsao psoospv op pasoa mp psapo>pooa oapppe ao sop sao aopso spa asp .apos asa>ooas

saw a mspsomm< .oo.moo was aoasopm oso .soppapsoomsasp .ospppps so» apoeppmm .aoasopm oso
soppapsoomsasp .mspppps sop apaeppma mops aopso Appsoo psooep asp op poooa mp aopso spa aspo

.m.m mph—wk EOLm. Um>wLmQ "QULZOW

 

spa sop sap pp saw v snaps Amamv Amamv smeev Amaav apps oapaopcso

somoam paz
pap pmp Ha Amps sappy Ampmv smpmv Ampav Asses smpmv mops oapmopssp

somoam zso
mom mmq Noe mom mom Nap N Aaa V swaps soaps aops a>oaocmz
aom aem mam amp om sq v seeps seems seams seems aops osmamm
coo oma ooe oom oom OOH so v soopv soaps osoomv apps camps:

 

oo.oooH 00.0mm oo.oom oo.oom oo.oon oo.ooo oo.oom oo.oo¢ ooo.o¢m soo.oom

 

Eapmxm aopm

 

aapmopao sp mono; po sop Lao aopss xppsos psoosp

 

aops ao aopsa opsoz op soppapas sp zooms mo so» Lao mssopam opeosoom paz--.om.¢ msm<p

 

 

172

the import parity price of rice. The results show that two rice
systems--upland rice and mangrove rice-~will have positive economic
returns if the world price of rice were such that the import parity

price was above 0500.00, or if the CIF price were above 0563.00 per

 

ton of paddy. This is about 40% above current price levels. Based
on current production practices, The Gambia can expect to have a
positive economic return on all the rice enterprises only if the
CIF price of paddy were above 0863.00 or 114% above current levels.
Looking at the production practices as observed in 1981/82,
it is possible to estimate the economic losses to the country if it
were to achieve rice self-sufficiency. Assuming a maximum per
capita consumption of 90 kgs/year12 and based on the current esti-
mated population of 603,000, The Gambia will require at least 54,300
tons of milled rice in order to be self-sufficient. Assuming a 66%
recovery rate, this is equivalent to 82,300 tons of paddy. The
current strategy for achieving rice self-sufficiency is based on an
expansion of irrigated rice in the Central and Eastern portions of

the country, where 24,000 hectares of land are earmarked for develop-

 

ment by the year 2000. From 1976 to 1980 the average domestic
production of paddy was about 29,000 tons per year (WAROA, 1981).
At this rate of production, The Gambia is left with a deficit of
53,000 tons of paddy to be satisfied through expansion of irrigated
land. At an average economic loss of 0461 [(479 + 443)/2] per ton

 

12This is the highest per capita consumption of rice recorded
since 1960 (WARDA, 1981).

   

 

 

173

of rice (in irrigated rice cultivation) this amounts to a total
economic loss of at least 024.57 million a year.

The analysis can be carried further by assuming that the
expansion of rice cultivation will necessarily result in the reallo-
cation of labor either from upland cereals or groundnut to rice

production.13

The underlying assumption here is that irrigated
rice cultivation can be expanded to meet the needed increase in
domestic production. It is further assumed that labor will be
reallocated from groundnuts instead of cereals. In this case the
benefits from eliminating the rice imports can be compared to the
cost of reduced groundnut production and exports. The comparison
will have to be made between wet season irrigated rice and ground-
nut since these two crops can be expected to compete ‘for labor in
the rainy season. In the dry season there is abundant labor avail-
able for the dry season irrigated rice.

Thus it can be assumed that half of the 53,300 of additional
paddy needed for rice self-sufficiency will be produced in the wet
season. ‘The current yield of the wet season irrigated rice was
estimated at 2,429 kilograms per hectare. Assuming that these yields
are maintained on an expanded hectarage, an increase of 10,972 hec-
tares [(53,300/2)/2.429] will be needed to produce 26,650 tons
(53,300/2) of paddy. A hectare of wet season irrigated rice land

 

 

 

13A similar analysis was carried out by CRED in 1977 using
different assumptions. They arrived at generally the same con-
clusions arrived at in this study.

 

 

 

 

 

174

demands about 324 workdays14 (about 38% contributed by males) and a
hectare of groundnut demands about 119 workdays (about 96% by males).
Without regard to labor distribution by sex, an increase in one hec-
tare of wet season irrigated rice will necessitate a decrease in
groundnut hectarage of about 2.72 hectares (324/119). However,
because of the division of labor along crop enterprise lines, the
relevant labor affected is only that contributed by males. To also
account for the labor contributed by females in groundnut production,
it can be assumed that the relevant labor that will be affected is
only 40% of the wet season irrigated rice labor demand or 130 work-
days. This means that an increase in one hectare of.wet season
irrigated land will reduce the area of groundnut by only 1.1 hectares
(130/119).

Following the above assumptions an increase of 10,972 hec-
tares in wet season irrigated land will reduce groundnut hectarage
by 12,069. At current yield levels of 1,717 kgs per hectare of ground-
nut, a reduction of 12,069 hectares will reduce total groundnut
production by 20,722 tons (12,069 x 1.717).

This analysis suggests that the replacement of 53,300 tons
of the imported paddy, with half being grown in the wet season could
cost a minimum of 20,722 tons in foregone groundnut production. The
economics of such a strategy obviously depends on the relative world
market prices of the two crops. Table 4.21 shows the savings or

losses that the country would incur given different levels of world

 

14

This does not include initial labor input in land devel0p-

 

 

 

 

 

 

175

.a>ppamas ago mamaspsacao up masampaa

 

 

 

smwms 4asp omam amam Name ammm oooa mama msoop aspmp 000p
sapmpv AMMM wasp vmmw oamm omme aooa Dams oasa Mpoop 0mm
smamwv A amp Hopp NNNN mawm mmmm Roam sows oaqm ooo
s aammv sopmmv sesvpv Aamgs mam exam was mesa mpaa coo
AMMMMW sppwav “aspmv smmpvv snapms sopoav Amp sma ppom oops cop
sasmwpv Mosoas soqasv Aaoaov soosmv “Names scooas Ammoav swamp maqp goo
swappv “momOHV “seems smmsss spamss smwmms AMOAVV smmmmv soappv oom

smewmpv saomapv o:pmHs samHva pamoppv “NaooHs “amass saamss sapomo smsamc Doe
sweaapv smoampv soasepv AMMNMHV Asmampv spaapps smamoo sopoas ”spans Assams Dam
saomspv spsaapv Ammampv Ammsqps AmaNMHV ANNNNHV AmmoOp. AmmooHV ”mamas sepmav Dom
hock

\m_mmpmov

ommp oomp ompp oopp omop ooop oom ohm com cos maps

, wo mops;

Acoh\mpmopmmv pocosoopw po apps; zppsao ppooxm xppsas

psooap

 

”armoram ocamoosp :pv maopso

upgoz pcasaawpo ca>po posooss pacoppaz mmoco co macaroppaom ppam ao: po poaaaw-i.pm a msmqp

176

Prices if a strategy of import substitution is pursued to the extent
0f rice SEIf-sufficiency through irrigated cultivation.15 The figures
repr‘esent the sum of rice import savings plus groundnut export
losses.

It should be stressed that the figures shown are minimum
because the costs of developing the irrigated perimeter and other
variable and fixed costs are not accounted for. Although the sta-
tistics should be interpreted with caution, the results are indi-
cative of the possible effects on the Gross National Product of The
Gambia if a policy of rice self-sufficiency is pursued. For example,
at the estimated import parity price for rice of 0340 per ton and
port parity price for groundnut of 0867 per ton, the reduction

the eX

055 national product will be in excess of 08.9 milliOn
in 9*

[20 722 x 867) — (26,650 x 340)]. For any groundnut/rice price
- higher than 1.28, there will be a reduction in Gross Nationai
ratio

Product-

W1
The purpose of this chapter was to estimate the financial
and economic costs and returns of the rice crop enterprises and
the upland crop enterprises. Financial enterprise budgets were

constructed from survey data for each of the crops analyzed,
______________~______

15Similar analysis could be carried out using the other
systems of cultivation to achieve rice self-suffiCiency. However,
their potential areas for expansion are very limited.

 

 

177

Among the rice enterprises, total variable costs plus fixed
expenses were highest in the dry season irrigated rice and lowest
in the upland rice. Dry season irrigated rice, however, had the
highest net enterprise income. This was due to the higher yields of
dry season irrigated rice and the lower yields of upland rice.

A calculation of the returns to family labor and management
showed that mangrove rice had the highest returns while the lowest
returns were recorded in wet season irrigated rice.

Only two rice enterprises showed returns per workday to family
labor and management higher than the enterprise wage rate--upland rice
and mangrove rice. The rest of the rice enterprises returns to
family labor and management that were lower than the enterprise wage
rates. Wet season irrigated rice had the lowest returns to family
labor and management. Further analysis revealed that for returns
per workday to family labor and management to equal the enterprise
wage rates, in all the rice enterprises, price per kilogram of paddy
will have to be increased by at least 57% above current levels.

The economic analysis of the rice enterprises showed that The
Gambia had a comparative disadvantage in rice production. Net econ-
omic returns per ton were all negative. Mangrove rice had the low—
est negative economic returns and dry season irrigated rice had the
highest negative economic returns. For the rice enterprises to have
positive economic returns, current yields per hectare must be
increased by at least 47.3% for upland rice, 77.6% for_bafgrg rice.
46.5% for mangrove rice, 141.0% for dry season irrigated rice, and

130.3% for wet season irrigated rice without affecting costs.

 

 

 

 

178

In the upland crops, groundnuts had the highest variable costs
while early millet had the lowest variable costs per hectare. Fixed
expenses were highest in sorghum and lowest in late (sagyg) millet.
Groundnut had the highest net enterprise income of 0751.05 per hec—
tare among all the crop enterprises considered. The lowest net
enterprise in the upland crops was in sorghum. Returns to family
labor and management was also highest in groundnut and lowest in
sorghum. Management income was positive for all the upland crops.

The Gambia enjoys a comparative advantage in the cultivation
of all upland crops. This was indicated by the positive net economic
returns for all the crops with groundnut enjoying a higher net
economic return than any of the crops considered.

Finally, a simple exercise showed that a policy designed to
achieve self-sufficiency in rice through the expansion of irrigated
perimeters can lead to substantial economic losses and a reduction
of the gross national product. An expansion in rice production will
necessarily lead to a reduction in groundnut export earnings, as
farmers reallocate labor from groundnut to meet the growing demand

in rice cultivation.

 

 

CHAPTER V

FARM INCOME ANALYSIS AND RESOURCE
USE AMONG GAMBIAN RICE FARMERS

Introduction

 

The central objective of this chapter is to provide an under-
standing of the current organization of production and resource use
among rice farmes in The Gambia. This basic understanding is of
paramount importance in determining the relevance, practicality,
suitability, and potential success of any change, innovation, or
development process that is targeted toward the achievement of
food self-sufficiency and the diversification of agriculture in
The Gambia.

Specifically, the current farming system will be described
based on information obtained during the year of the survey; the
data will be interpreted for the effects of such factors as regional
specificity, size of land holding, and animal traction adoption on
labor employment and farm incomes; and from the descriptions and
analysis, some implications for achieving food self-sufficiency will
be offered.

The preceeding chapters placed emphasis on individual crop
enterprises and evaluated their financial and economic costs and

benefits. In this chapter the unit of analysis is the household

179

 

 

 

 

 

180

(dabada). Farm budgets1 will be developed to shed some light on
.dabada farm organization, labor employment, or use and sources of

farm income. As a first step, an average gabgga_farm budget is
developed from the sample as a whole. In subsequent sections, some
criteria are used to divide the sample into regions, and size of land
holding. Such divisions make possible a detailed analysis of the data
to elucidate certain information that may otherwise be masked in the

aggregate sample.

Background

The social structure of the family unit was described in a
previous chapter. The basic residential unit is the kgrgo_which may
have subdivisions of dabadalu and sinkirolu. The dabada is the basic
production unit which more closely represents a nuclear family.
Eventually dabadalu break off to form independent kgrggs. The head
of the_kgrgg, the kordo—tio is usually the oldest male member of the
family. The kordo-tio is considered as the father of the family and
he wields considerable power and influence over members of his 59:09.
He is responsible for all the social, political, and economical aspects
of the family and he has authority over all the factors of production

and over the use and disposal of the farm output.

 

1For each budget or variable average used in this chapter,
the quantities were estimated as simple farm averages of the indi-
vidual farms. This procedure gives equal weight to the individual
farm variables and is therefore different from the weighted averages
used in the preceeding chapters. This is because the objective in
this chapter is to estimate averages of resource use and farm income
from each dabada and not to determine a representative household that
can be used as a model for planning purposes.

 

 

 

 

 

181

Defininggthe Farm

 

The farm as used in this study is defined to include all those
activities that are directly related to the crop enterprises that are
owned and controlled by a given dabada. This includes all work on the
crop enterprises plus work on general farm activities. Farm work on
fields owned by strange farmers are not included in this definition.

General farm activities include all those activities that

cannot be attributed to any single cr0p but are nevertheless related

 

to the farm. For example, fencing an area of land that contained more
than one crop or return of exchange labor2 received was considered as
a general farm activity.

Off-farm activities included a rather broad and vaguely defined

 

set of activities that made use of resources which would otherwise
have been employed in the farm at the time of such activities.
Religious and social activities or ceremonies--hunting, fishing, and
working for pay either on government or quasi-government owned
institutions or on another farmer's fields—-were considered as off-
farm activities. Activities of family members permanently employed

outside of the farm were not recorded under this category.

 

2Exchange labor received is accounted for under specific crop
enterprises. However, the return of exchange labor received has been
considered as a general farm activity because farmers do not necessarily
have to return labor on a crop or activity for which labor was received.
Also even though the number of days of exchange labor received might
equal the number of days of exchange labor returned, the number of
effective hours of work might differ. It is also possible that the
person receiving the labor might be different from the one returning
t e labor.

 

 

 

 

182

Resource Use by the Sample Population

 

Land

The land tenure system was discussed in Chapter II. In prin-
ciple, land in the rural areas cannot be sold, pledged, or rented.
Local residents only have usufruct rights. Table 5.1 shows the
average size of land holding for each dabada and the average area
devoted to each crop together with their relative distribution. The
average area of land managed per dabada was 2.24 hectares or given an
average family size of 7.8 persons, the average size of land culti-
vated per person was 0.29 hectares. Of this total area, 39.3% was
devoted to groundnut production and less than 1% to cotton production.
Upland cereals, which include maize, sorghum, early (sung) millet,
late (sanyg) millet and findo (digitaria), accounted for 29.9% of the
total land cultivated and all rice enterprises also accounted for
29.9% of the total land area cultivated. This gives an equal area of
land per person devoted to upland cereals and rice. More land was
devoted to food crops than to cash crop production.

The largest area of upland cereals cultivated was early (sung)
millet with an average of 0.26 hectares per dabada. Mangrove rice
and bafaro rice were the dominant rice cultivation systems with aver—
age gabaga areas of 0.23 and 0.24 hectares, respectively. In all, the
average area devoted to food crops——upland cereals and rice-—per person

was 0.17 hectares and the average area devoted to cash crops was 0.12

hectares per person.

 

 

 

 

 

183

TABLE 5.l-—Average Area per Household {Dabada} Devoted to Each
Crop for the Sample Population

 

 

 

Crop Area (Ha) Percent of Total
Groundnut 0.88 39.3
Early (Suno) millet 0.26 ll.6
Late (Sanyo) millet 0.07 3.l
Sorghum O.l5 6.7
Maize O.l9 8.5
Findo (digitaria) 0.00a 0.0
Cotton 0.02 0.9
Mangrove rice 0.23 l0.3
Bafaro Rice 0.24 l0.7
Dry Season Irrigated rice 0.06 2.7
Wet Season Irrigated rice 0.09 4.0
Upland Rice 0.05 2.2
Total 2 24 lOO 0

 

Source: Survey Data

aLess than 0.005 hectares.

 

 

184

 

Family size and composition. Table 5.2 presents the average

 

number of persons per_gabaga by sex and age. The average gabaga size
was 7.8 persons with 3.8 males and 4.0 females. The average number
of strange farmers was 0.2 per dabada, Adults 16-60 years old, made
up about 67% of the dabada size. Children below 10 years accounted
for about 17% of the total average family size and youths, between

10 and 15 years, made up about 15% of the family size.

Work on the farm. A detailed breakdown of labor input on the

 

crop enterprises by type of labor, sex, and age is shown in Table 5.3.
On the average labor input on the crop enterprises was 371.3 workdays
per dabada or 165.8 workdays per hectare of land. Of this total,
family labor provided 91.3%, strange farmers 3.9%, and other nonfamily
labor accounted for 4.8%. Hired contract labor accounted for only
2.0% of the labor input on crops. The low nonfamily labor input may
be due to the nature of the land tenure system which has prevented
the development of a landless laboring class.

Family labor input per person on the crop enterprises aver-
aged 43.5 workdays for the year. The average lab0r input per adult
was 60.3 workdays or 482.4 hours. Female adults averaged 61.7 work-

days while male adults averaged 58.7 workdays.3 These are equivalent

 

3The amount of exchange labor should be added to these aver-
ages because all exchange labor received must be returned. However,
although the days of work between exchange labor received and exchange
labor returned might be the same, the number of actual hours worked
might differ substantially.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

185

TABLE 5.2—-Average Number of Persons Per Household
(Dabada)by Type of Labor for the Sample

Population

 

Labor Type

Average Number

 

Males l6-60 years
l0-l5 years

0-9 years

Total Male

Females Over 60 years
l6-6O years
lO-l5 years

0-9 years
Total Females

Total Family

Strange Farmers

(MOON
CDU'ICDU‘T

COMO
(ID-DNA

4:.
O

L

\J
(I)

1

O
N

 

Source: Survey Data

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

mzooxsoz mo.o sosp mmap so poosp Losop a apaopocp 0.0 mm oacapsa maeoopp ppq
. u
.ooeo suaa op oapo>ao sosa— papop mo pcaueao mzosm

Losa— mo aoxp soaa As oapaspspcoo poacp cosap popop mo psaogao mzosms

m

opao Aa>g=m "aucoom

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

o.oop m.o a.e o.o~ o.ow m.~ p._ c.o m._ o.~ N.m n.v w.mm spapop ao pcaocas
“Hoopm.P~m m.m~ m.~_ a.om a.on q.o _.¢ N.0 o.~ m.o~ o.mp m.~— n.mo poocp Looms papop
m.v m.n— w.o m.— m.m m.q ~.o «.0 u N.o m.o m.o m.o F.m wasp: —ap0H
m.o ~.p N.0 o.o ¢.o o.o o.o - - . o.o . o.o . maposas poaepsoo
~._ ~.m N.0 o.o N.o o.N o.o N.0 . _.o —.o _.o N.c m.N mapaz poospcou
m.p m.c s.o N.0 m.p n._ p.o . i i . o.o - P.o ma—asas amcosuxm
m._ o.m o.o m.o ~._ 8.0 - N.o - _.o N.c ~.o m.o m.m ma_mz ameasuxa "cones oasp:
o.m o.e_ m.o o.— 0.0 s.m o.o o._ . 8.0 o._ N.p m.p o.v “apazv gassed amsmspm
m._o ~.mmm o.vm N.m— m.m~ p.mo m.o _.N N.o o.o o.mm m.o— m.mp o.ow poosp Loses mppEas papop
Mw a.o m.m m.o o.p - - - n.o - 4.0 ~.o m.o N.0 N.o AppEeu Lasso so
11 ~.ms m.mo_ m.o_ m.m a.mo o._o m.m m.c N.0 o.o m.o o._ m._ m.¢ ma—aEau _opop
o.o p.o . i _.o o.o . i - - i - 0.0 0.0 .mph om La>o
o.o ~.o o.o - _.o o.o . - - - o.o - o.o p.o .msz o-o
m.o o.~ m.o o.o _._ v.0 o.o p.o - o.o _.o i _.o m.o .we» mpiop
o.¢q o.mo— N.¢_ m.w m.oo m._o m.a N.0 ~.o o.o e.o o.p ¢._ o.m ,mex oo-o_ mapoEas As .
N.¢¢ p.ocp N.w e.m m.m ~.o m.o m._ - o.o m.- N.o m.mp ¢.—w mayo: popop
¢.o m.p p.o . N.0 oo.o - - - —.o m.o i p.o m.o .msz oio
w.e m.np m.N N.o o.o ~.o 0.0 _.o - m.o o.m m.— m._ M.“ .msx m_-o_
o.om m.ms_ _.o ~.m ¢.¢ o.o m.c ~._ - ~.m o.- o.~ m.~p o.m~ .mca om-op mapax pa xppEau
ax pe< pa: xso aopm aopm aopm papppz papppz
mpapo» aopm oapaopesp a>ososaz dududm. osopo: :cppoo oocps apos xpcaw sososom aNpaz pesosooew sosas so aoxp

 

coppopoooa apoEam asp soa smxaossoz cHV
ampsosapcm ooso osa Loses ao aux» xs Aaoasaov oposamaoz Lao poosp Loses co soppsspcpmpo aooca>< --m.m msmsp

 

 

 

187

to 493.6 hours for females and 469.6 hours for males on the cr0p
enterprises.

The highest labor input per crop was devoted to groundnut
which utilized 25.8% of the total labor input on crops. This was
followed by bafaro rice and mangrove rice which each utilized 20.6%
of the total labor input on crops, while rice and upland cereals used
55.4% and 17.7%, respectively. Labor input in subsistence food pro-
duction was about three times that on cash crop production.

In terms of employment, the highest employer of labor per
hectare was in the rice enterprises. The estimated labor inputs per
hectare based on this simple averages were 33.0, 318.3, 296.7, 281.1
and 188.0 workdays for mangrove rice, bafarg_rice, dry season irri-
gated rice, wet season irrigated rice, and upland rice, respectively.
Labor inputs per hectare for groundnut, maize, sorghum, early (sung)
millet, late (sagyg) millet and cotton were 108.8, 92.1, 80.0, 112.7,
100.0, and 205.0 workdays, respectively.4 In terms of year-round
employment, irrigated rice will be the highest employer of labor per
hectare. This is not surprising because irrigated rice cultivation
is a biological—chemical technology that is land saving but labor

using and can be carried on throughout the year.

Total labor inpgt. The total labor input is the sum of the

 

labor inputs in the crop enterprises, general farm activities, and

off-farm activities. These labor inputs are summarized in Table 5.4

 

4These labor inputs differ from those in the preceeding
Chapters because of the different methods employed in arr1v1ng at

the averages.

 

1883

mo.o sasp mma_ ago o.o mo oasapca masompso

apoo >a>som "aosoom

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

o.oop N.om N.m o.oo papop ao psaosas
s.mmm N.Nap o.o_ m.p~m poosp eosos popoh
N.Np --- N.0 m.~_ Loses oaepz papo»
N._ --- ~._ maposaa poaepsou

m.o --- _.o N.o mapaz poaepsou

m.¢ --- --- m.¢ mapoEas aososoxw

m.m --- _.o o.m mapaz amsasoxw ”goons wasp:
N.m— --- o.o o.¢p gasses aosaspm
_.pom N.Nep ~.a_ N.0mm Loses »F_Eeu pepop
a.m o.o m.o m.m stEeu Lasso so

F.NNN m.mv w.m m.ow— mapasau papa»

p.o --- 0.0 _.o meaaz om La>o

N.0 --- --- N.0 memo» mio

o.m c._ 0.0 m.~ meaa» m—iop

o.m_N m.~¢ e.w o.oo_ meaax oo-o_ mapasas As

«.mum m.mo o.—ri p.oo_ mapoz popok

m._ an- ao.o m._ mgoa» mic

m.mp m.— m.o w.Np meaaz mpio—

_.¢mm o.sa m.o_ a.o¢_ mesa» oo-op mapez Am sppEas
.apop Eeaauawo Egan pasacao ooeu Loses wo aoxp

 

soppapzoos aposam asp Lop Amzooseoz ch app>ppo<
Lowe: osa sosas ao aux» as Aooasoov oposamoo: Lao poosp Looms ao soppospspmpoi-a.m wsmqp

 

 

189

and are differentiated by type of labor, sex, and age. The total labor
input per_gabada was 533.4 workdays. Of this total, crop enterprise
activities accounted for 69.6%, general farm activities 3.7%, and
off—farm activities 16.7%.5 Most of the general farm activities and

all of the off-farm activities were performed by family labor. Male
family labor accounted for 55.2% of the general farm activities and
69.1% of the off-farm activities. Female family labor accounted for
42.4% and 30.9% of the general farm and off-farm activities, respec-
tively.

On the whole, family males contributed 51.6% of the total
labor while family females contributed 41.6% of the total labor input.
The average total labor input per adult was 90.8 workdays or 726.4
hours. This excludes labor input on livestock and on household
activities. Livestock activities are mainly the responsibility of
youths between the ages of 10 and 15 years.

Adult females put in 80.7 workdays or 645.6 hours per person
while adult males put in 101.6 workdays of 813.1 hours per person.
These annual labor inputs are low by international standards and are
also low when compared to other studies in Africa. In a review of
fifty studies in tropical Africa, Cleave (1974) noted that about
1,000 hours per year are spent by adults on agricultural field opera-

tions. In Sierra Leone, a nationwide rural survey revealed that about

 

5This doesn't include household activities of cleaning, cook—
ing, babysitting, etc., which are usually done by women. These house-
hold activities can average about two hours every day of the week.

 

 

190

1,200 hours are spent by adults on agricultural activities, processing
and nonfarm work (Byerlee et al., 1977).

However, caution must be exercised in making this comparison.
The amountof labor input in agricultural activities is strongly influ-
enced by the monthly distribution of rainfall. Other things being
equal, one would expect the amount of labor in agricultural activities
in areas with longer rainy seasons to be higher than those in areas
with shorter rainy seasons as experienced in The Gambia. Similarly,
labor inputs in off-farm activities are affected by sociological
factors and the availability of nonfarm work opportunities. This is
especially true in The Gambia where nonfarm activities, like black-
smithing, goldsmithing, etc., are considered lower caste job opportu-
nities. This caste constraints limits the opportunities of the
higher caste families in nonfarm income earning activities.

Notwithstanding the above comments, it seems as if the total
time spent on agricultural and nonagricultural activities over the
course of the year is low. Labor inputs on the farm and on off-farm
activities were estimated at about 64 workdays (512 hours) and 27
workdays (216 hours) per adult family member, respectively. At the
peak monthly labor period in September, the adult family member total
labor input was about 13 workday (104 hours) for the month. Given a

22-day work month,6 farm labor input averaged 4 hours a day, and total

 

6This is estimated by subtracting two days, Friday and Wednes-
day, from the week and multiplying that by the number of weeks in the
year (52). The product is then divided by 12 to get an estimate of the
possible days of work in a month.

 

 

191

labor input averaged about 5 hours a day per adult during the peak
month.

This low labor input, even in the month of greatest activity,
may be evidence of underemployment in Gambian agriculture. But such
an assumption should not be made without an examination of the uses
to which nonagricultural time is put and the extent to which it could
be diverted to farming given the existence of an opportunity for a
profitable employment in agricultural production and the constraint on
the use of labor on farm work.

Off-farm activities accounted for about 27% of the total labor
input. Remunerative nonfarm labor, that is, labor input which earned
money or produced output that could be sold accounted for less than
10% of the total labor input on off-farm activities. Remunerative
nonfarm labor input averaged about one workday per dabada per month,
except for January and December which averaged two workdays each. The
rest of the off-farm activities labor input was on social, religious,
and other activities that could not easily be valued.

There was an inverse relationship between farm labor input and
nonrenumerative off-farm labor input on the one hand, and farm labor

7 . .
An increase in

input and estimated leisure time on the other hand.
the demand for labor in farm activities was associated with a reduc-

tion in nonremunerative off-farm work and estimated leisure

 

7Leisure time was estimated by deducting the total monthly
labor input on farm and off—farm activities from the potential monthly
labor supply for the average dabada.

 

 

192

8 Labor input on remunerative off-farm activities was about

time.
constant throughout the year.

The implication from the above is that Gambia farmers prefer
to reduce their labor input on nonpaying off-farm activities and on
leisure time, rather than reduce the time spent on remunerative
activities whenever there is an increased demand for farm labor. It
is difficult to reduce time spent on remunerative activities because

some of these activities either require year round commitments to

ensure continuity or urgent financial needs of families may cause

 

family members to devote time on these activities even at the peak
labor demand periods.

The extent to which labor input on nonpaying off-farm activi-
ties and leisure time could be tapped for productive agricultural
activities will depend on the marginal utility obtained for working
on the farm and the marginal disutility of giving up time in other
activities and leisure. The fact that farmers are willing to reduce

their leisure time and nonpaying off-farm commitments suggest that

 

8Linear equations using ordinary least squares showed the
following coefficients:

Y1 = 15.24 — 0.14X R = .067
(—4.8185)

Y2 = 97.62 - O.86X R = 0.98
(23.7593)*

where Y1 Labor input on nonremunerative off-farm activity

..<
II

2 Estimated leisure time

X
H

Labor input on the farm

*Figures in parentheses are t—values.

 

 

193

farmers attach a higher value to their farm work. The problem is
that it is difficult to quantify the utilities obtained in leisure
time and nonpaying off—farm commitments to determine how far these
diversions could be carried out. The degree to which labor time
could be diverted to agriculture is also constrained by the seasonal-

ity of farm work.

Seasonality of labor. Although the annual total work by family

 

members is rather low, one must also consider the overriding importance
of the seasonality of farm work. The total monthly distribution of
labor is shown in Table 5.5 and is graphically depicted in Figure 5.1.
Average dabada labor input peaked in September which accounted for
14.1% of the total labor demand. This month corresponded with the
transplating of rice. This emphasizes the high demand placed on

labor by the rice enterprises in general and by the transplanting
activity in particular. The monthly coefficient of variation in farm
work was about 61%. This coefficient may vary depending on the dura-
tion of the rainfall.

The allocation of time worked by family members on farm and
off-farm activities is undertaken in such a way as to attempt to even
out the annual flow of labor. For example, general and off-farm
activities were concentrated in the dryer months of December to May.
This period accounted for about 60% of the labor input in the general
and off-farm activities. Also the monthly coefficient of variation
for the total labor input was about 38% which indicates an attempt

to even out the monthly labor input. However, for a number of reasons

 

 

 

194

TABLE 5.5--Monthly Distribution of Labor Input by Activity
for the Sample Population (in workdays)

 

Crop General Off-Farm Total

 

 

Farm
January 21 2 l7 40
February l3 2 l4 29
March 5 2 15 22
April 7 2 I3 22
May ll 3 IS 29
June 34 3 l0 47
July 55 2 5 62
August 58 - 7 65
September 64 l l0 75
October 33 l l3 47
November 37 I ll 49
December 33 l ll 45
Total 37l 20 l4l 532

 

Source: Survey Data

 

 

 

195

Off-farm Activities

General Farm Activities

= Farm Activities

DSVE

Workdays per Household

 

___—‘

J F M ll M J J A S 0 N 0
Months

Figure 5.1—-Monthly Labor Profile per Household(0abada) of the Whole
amp e. .—

 

 

196

farmers are not able to even out the total monthly labor input. These
reasons are related to the lack of off-farm employment opportunities
and to the short rainy season.

The implications for development programs and the introduction

 

of improved technology are important. In order to introduce relevant
improved technology, planners must take cognizance of the timing of
the labor required for its adoption. Too often the technological

development aim of maximizing yields per unit area or of the increase

 

in the area cultivated, has resulted in the development of irrelevant
improved technology which, if adopted, could result in even greater

seasonality and sometimes bottlenecks of labor (Norman et al., 1979).

The labor equation. It is usual for studies like this to

 

develop a labor equation where the potential labor supply less the
observed labor demand is made equal to a labor surplus or deficit.

This is often interpreted as evidence of underemployment or full employ-
ment. Assuming a 22-day work month and based on average adult popula-
tion of 5.2 persons per dabada, the potential monthly supply of labor
per dabada was 114.4 workdays. This was higher than any monthly

labor demand in Table 5.5. This is often interpreted as a presence

 

of surplus labor throughout the year and is, therefore, used as evi-
dence of underemployment.

However, neither the existence nor the absence of a monthly
labor demand higher than the potential monthly labor supply can pro—
vide any conclusive evidence of full employment or underemployment.

As was stated in an earlier chapter, when labor profiles are aggregated

   

 

 

 

197

in months, critical peak periods of labor of shorter durations may not
show up in the profiles because the labor input is spread over a month.
Similarly, it is true that an extended peak may not be apparent
because it has been divided between months.

It is also possible that a monthly labor demand higher than

 

the monthly labor supply could appear if the monthly labor input was
disaggregated by sex. This is especially true where the division of
labor by sex is along crop enterprise lines whose peak demand on labor

comes at different times of the year. In The Gambia, women are usually

 

fully engaged in the planting and harvesting months of September and
January, respectively. At this time men are relatively less busy.
Conversely, men are very busy in the months of August and October/
November when women are relatively less busy. In this kind of arrange-
ment, aggregating data on a monthly basis without regard to sexual
differences as is done here may tend to even out the busy and slack
periods of the different sexes. The observed low labor inputs may

also be due to the fact that home production activities, especially

for women, are not fully accounted for.

Farm Equipment

 

 

Capital investment in farming in The Gambia is limited to the
purchase of ox-drawn equipment and draft animals. Ox-plowing started
in The Gambia around the 1950's when single purpose implements were
introduced. It was not until the late half of the seventies, however,
that widespread use of this equipment was achieved. By the middle of

the 1970's the sine hoe was introduced and popularized. The sine hoe

 

 

198

basically consists of a T-shaped frame which can be pulled by draft
animals. Several attachments, including a seeder for planting,
mouldboard plows for plowing or ridging and weeding tines can be
attached to the frame. Carts were also introduced to be used for

transportation.

 

The average number of each type of equipment and draft animals
owned per dabada is shown in Table 5.6. The most common implement

was the seeder which can be used for planting upland cereals even

 

without initial plowing. Donkeys were the most common draft animals
in use mainly because they are cheaper than the other animals, averag-
ing about 0150 per animal. Horses and bulls, on the other hand, sold
for more than 0500 per animal. Allowing for depreciation, the opening
values of the equipment and animals were estimated at 0130 and 0285
per_dabaga, respectively.

Animal traction was used on the farm for an average of about

50 hours per dabada.

Farm Income Analysis

 

An average farm budget per dabada is shown in Table 5.7.

 

Other general data on household resources are also included.

Value of Output

 

The average value of farm output or gross farm income repre-
sents the sum of the values of all the crop enterprise outputs. The
output values of each crop enterprise and their total contributions

to the total gross farm income are presented in Table 5.8. All

 

 

199

TABLE 5.6--Average Number of Ox-Drawn Equipment/Animals Owned
per Household (Dabada) for the Sample Population

 

 

 

Equipment/Animal Average Number
Seeder (with Plates) 0.69
Mouldboard Plow 0.4l
Cart 0.22
Weeding Tines 0.36
Bulls O.l4
Donkeys 0.57
Horses O.l3

 

Source: Survey Data

 

200

TABLE 5.7--Average Household (Dabada) Farm Budget for the Sample
Population "

 

1. General Data
a. Average Land Holding (Ha) 2,24

b. Average Family Size:
Males

 

3.8
Females 4.0
Total 7.8
c. Adult Family Members (16—60 years) 5.2
d. Strange Farmers 0.2
e. Hours of Animal/Ox-equipment Input 50.0
f. Number of Households (Dabada) 90.0
2. Income and Expenditure (Dalasis)
a. Value of Farm Output 1777.59
b. Operating Expenses
Labor 27.24
Seeds 65.09
Fertilizer 5.79
Animal/Ox-equipment l.85
Irrigation/Plowing 42.60
Total Operating Expenses 142.57
c. Gross Margin 1635.02
d. Fixed Costs
Depreciation
Animals 18.00
Ox-equipment 15.00
Other Hand-tools 3.04
Strange Farmer 24.00
Total Fixed Costs 60.04
e. Total Costs 202.61
f. Net Farm Income 1574.98
9. Off—farm Earnings 50.31
h. Net Family Earnings 1625.29

 

Source: Survey data

 

 

201

 

mo.o sasp mmap ago o.o ma oaoeooas masoopaa

.m-m osa pim mapsap osa open >a>s=m soap oa>psao "aosaom

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

o.oo_ o.oop o.oo_ am.sssp mpapop
p.p m.o m.p mo.- coppoo
e.mm m.m~ p.5m me.mma mops .apop
m.a 0.4 ~.a o_.op_ mops eapmmpsee camaam pa:
m.e ~.~ o.¢ oo.~m oops oapoopeep somoam as:
o.o~ m.o_ o.~_ am.m~N aops asosmces
a.o~ e.o_ m.Np am.NNN mops oeapem
m.~ ~.N ~._ mm.pN 66pm agape:
u.sp m.m~ m.sp oo.opm mpeaeao ace—a: pepop
oflo o.o ao.o oe.o Aapseppmpo oeepp
m.p _.m a._ oe.m~ papppz o cam apes
a.s o._p N.o as.mo_ papppz Hoesmv spasm
N.m “.8 e.m e_.mo Essoeom
5.4 m.a o.o ea.mo_ aNpmz
a mm m.mm m.m¢ ne.oae pscoesosa

oamz Loses oam: N Ampmopaou psaoEK.

ao pcaoeas osos ao psaosas aeoosp Esau po aoczom oosu

 

mmaoasaov oposamzo: sass

soppopooos aposom

asp sop oosu soam so» oam: Loses osa osas amapsaoeas oso asoosp Esau po maoeoom--x.m msmqb

 

 

 

202

output was valued at the official producer farm gate prices of 00.50,
00.51, 00.49, and 00.53 per kilogram of groundnut, rice, upland
cereals, and cotton, respectively.

The average gross value was 01,777.59 per ggbaga_or 0227.80
per person. The groundnut enterprise was by far the largest single
contributor to the total gross-farm income with a percentage of 43.9%,
further emphasizing its importance in The Gambian economy. Upland
cereals and rice contributed about 17.5% and 37.1% of the total gross
farm income, respectively. Early (sung) millet contributed the high-
est percentage to the gross farm income among the upland cereals, while
mangrove rice and_bafarg rice contributed the highest among the rice
enterprises. Gross farm income per hectare was 0793.57 and gross
farm income per unit of farm labor input was 04.54.

A comparison of the percent of income contributed to the per-
cent of land and labor used show that while groundnut contributed 43.9%
of the gross income, it utilized only 39.3% of the land and 25.8% of
the total farm labor. In contrast, upland cereals contributed 17.5%
of the gross income, but used 19.9% of the land and 17.7% of the
labor. The 1~HXE enterprises, on the other hand, contributed 37.1%
of the income while using 29.9% of the land and 55.4% of the labor.
These results show that upland cereals are less productive per unit
of land than both groundnut and rice, and they are also less pro—
ductive per unit of labor than groundnut, but more productive per unit
of labor than rice. Rice is more productive per unit of land than

groundnuts.

 

 

 

 

203

 

The large differences in proportions of income contributed by

each crop and the proportions of labor devoted to each crop may be

 

due to the method of valuation employed. Assuming that resources are
efficiently allocated, one would expect that farmers would devote

more of their labor to the enterprise which contributes most to the
gross or net farm income per unit of labor. This is not apparent in
Table 5.8, especially for the groundnut and rice enterprises. Ground-
nut account for a higher percentage of the income than does rice, but
a lesser percentage of the labor is devoted to it than is devoted

to rice. This seeming discrepancy may suggest that farmers‘ sub-
jective valuation of the paddy output may be higher than the price

used to value it in this study.

Operating Expenses and Gross Margin

The operating expenses are made up of labor, seeds, fertilizer,
animal, and ox—equipment hire, and irrigation and plowing expenses.
The total average operating costs per dabada was estimated at 0142.57.

Of this cost, seeds made up about 45.7% while irrigation and plowing,

 

euuilabornmde up 29.9% and 19.1%, respectively. Hiring of animal and

ox-equipment accounted for a small percentage of the Operating

 

expenses because farmers are often able to borrow equipment at no
cost.
The average operating ratio, which relates operating expenses

to gross income, was 0.08. This means that 00.08 was spent on operat-

ing expenses for every 01.00 of gross income.

   

 

204

The gross margin per dabada is obtained by deducting the total
operating expenses from the gross farm income. The gross margin
amounted to 01,635.02 per dabada or 0209.62 person or 0729.92 per
hectare of land managed. The gross margin per workday of family labor

on the farm was 04.56.

Fixed Costs

 

Fixed costs were made up of depreciation on draft animals,
ox-equipment, and other hand tools and an estimated cost of the
strange farmer who, in this study, is considered as a permanent
laborer. Depreciation was calculated by the straight line method in
which the salvage value was deducted from the purchase price and
the remainder divided by the life expectancy of the equipment or total
productive life of the animal. The values obtained for each item were
accumulated to obtain the total depreciation.

Bulls appreciated in value while donkeys and horses had zero
salvage value.9 Thus, the appreciation in bulls was deducted from
the depreciation in horses and donkeys to arrive at an estimate of the
animal depreciation. The total fixed cost per dabada was estimated
at 060.04. The fixed ratio, which relates the fixed costs to the gross
income, was 0.03. In other words, for every 01.00 gross income gen—

erated, 00.03 was spent on fixed costs.

 

9Donkeys or horses which either for sickness or age are no
longer productive in the farm are simply left to die. The carcasses
are left to rot. The average productive life of bulls was about six
years after which they are either replaced or sold for meat.

 

 

 

 

 

 

205

Total Costs

 

Total cost, which is the sum of the operating expenses and
the fixed costs, amounted to 0202.61 per dabada. The gross ratio,
which indicates the proportion of gross farm income needed to meet
total expenses, is the sum of the operating ratio and the fixed ratio.
The gross ratio amounted to 0.11. Thus, for every 01.00 generated in

gross income, 00.11 or 11% of it was used to meet total expenses.

Net Farm Income

 

Net farm income is the total value of the farm output less
total expenses. It is a measure of the reward to the family for their
labor, management, capital, and land. The average net farm income
per dabada was 01,574.98 or 0201.92 per person. Net farm income per
unit of family labor and per unit of land was 04.39 and 0703.12,
respectively. Since no capital was borrowed for productive purposes
and there was no interest paid, net farm incomewas equal to net

farm earnings.

Return to Family Labor and

 

Management

 

The return to family labor and management can be estimated by
inputing a charge on equity capital and an opportunity cost on land.
Assuming a 15% interest charge on capital and an opportunity cost of
0400.00 per hectare of irrigated land only, the net return to family
labor and management was estimated at 01,488.59 per gabaga_or 0190.84

per person. Net return to family labor and management per unit of

family labor input was 04.15.

 

 

 

 

 

206

Net Family Earnings

 

Net family earnings is the sum of the net farm income plus
off-farm earnings. The average off-farm earnings per gabgga_was
050.31 or about 3% of the total gross income. Total net family earn-
ings were thus estimated at 01,625.29 per gabaga_or 0208.37 per
person.10 This is an estimate of the disposable income available to
each person for all purposes in the 1981/82 season. If all this
income were to be spent on rice purchases and at the retail price of
00.79 per kilogram of milled rice, this means that each individual
would have had about 264 kilograms of rice for consumption.

In 1981 R. A. Thamos estimated that 182.5 kilograms per capita
per year of cereals was the minimum food grain production target which
would meet FAO/WHO11 recommendations for a daily intake of cereals
in The Gambia. This amount was estimated to provide 1,750 calories
per day. At this rate Gambian rice farmers would have to spend about
69% of their income or 0143.78 per person on cereals if their minimum
daily calorie intake was to be satisfied from rice consumption alone.
The average gross value of cereals produced on the farm was 0124.37
per person and was less than 69% of the gross income. This means that
farmers would be unable to meet their minimum calorie intake from grain

produced on the farm if rice were to completely replace the other

cereals as a source of calories.

 

10At the exchange rate of $1 = 02.20 in May, 1982, this is
equal to a per capita income of $94.71.

11FAO/WHO = Food and Agriculture Organization/World Health
Organization.

 

 

 

207

In summary, the above discussions have tried to throw light
on the farm organization of rice farmers. The results showed that
groundnut was the most important source of income among the crop
enterprises. Off-farm income accounted for about 3% of total gross
income. The above results, however, are based on a single average for
all the sample population. This approach tends to mask a lot of other
details. In the following sections, an attempt is made to disaggregate
the data in a manner that will give a better understanding of the farm-

ing systems.

Regional Influence on Farm Organization and Farm Income

 

The cr0ps grown in any area are determined by three fundamental
factors, that is, social, physical, and economic considerations.
Rainfall, temperature, and soil conditions are the main determinants
of the physical ability of crops to grow. Nevertheless, although the
physical condition might be favorable as far as growth of a particular
cr0p is concerned, social, e.g., personal tastes, tradition, etc.,
and economic factors, e.g., prices and ease of transportation, may
bring about cr0pping pattens very different from what would physically
be possible (Norman, 1973).

To examine the effects of some of these factors, the sample
villages were divided into three regions based on the predominant
rice cultivation system in each village. These regions were mangrove
rice region,_bgfarg rice region, and irrigated rice region. The man-
grove rice region roughly corresponded to the western one-third of the
area covered by the survey. The sample population in this region

was made up of about 32.1% Wollof and 67.9% Mandingo.

 

 

 

 

208

The_bafarg region corresponded to the central one-third of the
area covered in the survey. This region normally has less rainfall
than the western and eastern regions. The sample population was made
up of about 62.8% Fulla and 47.2% Mandingo. The irrigated rice region
roughly corresponded to the eastern one-third of the country and all

the sample dabadalu_in this region were of the Mandingo Tribe.

Resource Use

 

Land

The area devoted to each crop and its relative contribution
to the total land holding per gabaga_is shown in Table 5.9 for each
of the three regions. The average total area cultivated per dabada
was 2.90 hectares, 1.96 hectares, and 1.91 hectares for the mangrove,
bafgrg, and irrigated rice regions, respectively. In the mangrove
and irrigated rice regions, groundnut accounted for more than 40%
of the total land area, while it accounted for only 17.6% of the land
in the bafarg rice region. In fact, PEIEEQ rice accounted for 30.6%
of the total average land cultivated in the bafgrg region.

In the mangrove rice growing region, upland cereals and rice
accounted for 26.2% and 25.9% of the total land area, respectively.
In the bafarg rice region, the percentages were 36.8% and 35.6%, while
in the irrigated rice regions, they were 27.1% and 27.9%, respectively.
The area of land cultivated per adult person was 0.45, .44, and 0.41
hectares in the mangrove, bafarg, and irrigated rice regions,
respectively.

The figures in Table 5.9 seem to show a movement in the

direction of a specialization in one upland cereal crop in each region.

 

 

2C0)

 

 

.copmac

soaa cm mo—osamoos po Lasso: as

p zosm mamaspsasao sp masoopsa

opoo za>e=m “aossom

 

 

 

 

 

 

o.oo_ pa._ 0.00. om.p o.oo_ oa.N _apop
a.a N_.o - - - - mops camps:
o.m o_.o o.¢ mo.o . . oops oapaopssp somoam paz
v6 mic o; mod 1 i 00.5. vapours: :omoWMIE
: . o.om oo.o . . aopm osapam
1 I I m.mN m~.0 0>wm m>ogmcmz
p.m oo.o - - - - .iiiiiiiiiieoppoo
m.o po.o - - - - sapsappopev oee_u
mum a_.o m.a_ mm.o o._ mo.o anpaz
..ep “N.0 ~.a a_.o - - Essotom
a._ mo.o N.“ mp.o - - pap—p: poxqawp apes
o._ No.o o.m so.o N.mN ms.o pap—p: seesmv »_sea
a pa oa.o a.e~ em.o a.se am._ assessesa
N sass eats e sass eat< a sass aas<
ems oops asaaem aoso

asamv maps empampssp

as

aAmNV aopm a>oemsaz

 

sopmaa soppa>pppzu
aopm co aoxp come: As oosu soam op oapo>ao Aooosaov oposamzo: Lag aae< amasa><--o.m msm<p

 

 

210

This movement seems to be nearly complete in the mangrove rice region
where early (sugg) millet accounted for 96.1% of the total area
devoted to upland cereals. The only other upland cereal grown is
maize. In the bafarg rice region, the movement is toward a speciali-
zation in maize which accounted for 44.4% of the total area devoted
to upland cereals. The other major cereals,sorghum and late (saflyg)
millet, accounted for about 25.0% and 10.8% of the upland cereals area,
respectively.

In the irrigated rice region, the movement in specialization
on upland cereals is toward sorghum. This crop accounted for about
53% of the total area devoted to upland cereals. The other major
cereal was maize which accounted for 37.3% of the area under upland
cereals.

The movement toward a regional specialization of certain
upland cereals implies that development efforts which are targeted
toward improvirm16ereal cultivation in The Gambia must be region spe-
cific. Concentration on one crop only means that certain regions

might benefit to the total exclusion of other regions.

Labor

Family size and composition. Table 5.10 shows the average

 

number of people per household (dabada) by sex and age for each of
the regions. The mangrove rice region had the highest number of
people per gabggg with an average of 9.9 people. The bgjarg_and
irrigated rice regions had an average of 6.3 and 7.2 people per

dabada, respectively. Males made up no more than 50% of the dabada

 

 

211

 

.copoas soaa spAzpaoasoov moposamsos po Lasso: gosm mamaspcasmo :p masoopao

apao za>s=m ”aosoom

lil‘llllll‘ll

 

 

meascoa aosoepm

 

 

 

No To mo
3 me as 3.25 2pr
o.m m.m o.m maFaEaa Papo»
mflo N.0 o.P mama» oio
m.o m.o m.o mama» mpiop
a m ¢.N m.m msaaz ooiop
. . N.o mama» on sa>o mapasaa
o.m o.m o.s ape: papop
oflo «.0 m.o mama» mac
so 2 N; 28» 2-2
m N _.N _.m meaax ooiop mafia:
aAva aopm oapampssp afiomv aopm.aumwmm opwmv aopm a>osmsaz costs so aoxh

 

sopmam soppa>pppou aopm sooaz ao
aoxp as osa Loses ao aoxp as Aaoasaqv oposamoo: Lao msomsas mo Lassaz amasa><--op.m wsm<p

 

 

 

212

   

population in each region. Adult persons of 16 to 60 years old, made
up 64.6%, 71.4%, and 65.3% of the dabada population in the mangrove,
bafaro, and irrigated rice regions, respectively. The average number

of strange farmers in each region was 0.3, 0.1, and 0.2, respectively.

Work on the farm. Tables 5.11, 5.12, and 5.13 show a break-

 

down of labor input on the crop enterprises by type of labor, sex,

and age for the mangrove, bafaro, and irrigated rice regions, respec-

 

tively. On the average, total labor input on the crop enterprises
per dabada was 491.1 workdays in the mangrove rice region, 291.8 work—
days in the bafaro rice region, and 351.8 workdays in the irrigated

rice region. Of these totals, family labor contributed no less than

 

89.6% in each region. Nonfamily labor contributed 3.5%, 5.2%, and
4.3%, while strange farmers contributed 2.0%, 5.2%, and 6.0% of the
total labor input on cr0ps in the mangrove, bafarg, and irrigated
rice regions, respectively.

The average labor input on cr0ps per family adult was 67.2,
56.7, and 58.1 workdays in the mangrove, bafarg, and irrigated rice
regions, respectively. These results are contrary to expectations.
Since irrigated rice cultivation is a labor intensive technology and
can be carried out throughout the year, one would have expected that
adult labor input in the irrigated rice region would be substantially
higher than in the other regions. The results show a higher labor
input in the mangrove rice region than in the bafarg_and irrigated
rice regions (which are about equal). This may be due to the fact that

when irrigated rice was introduced, male farmers in this region

 

 

 

 

 

.m.o sosp mma_ aso 0.0 mo oasapsa masoopso
.ooso sooa op oapo>ao scoop _opop mo psaocao mzosm

s
.eoso— ao aoxp As oaposptpsoo poosp Losop —opop so pcaocao mzosm

o
opoo >a>e=m ”aosoom

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII I I I I o I . .
o.oo_ 1 1 N.om 1 m s_ m _ N pm spapop so pcausaa
11111111 1 . 1 1 1 1 1 _.mm 1 o.o «.mmp pzosp Loso o o
o.oo_ _._me 1 m aem a p p p
1 . 1 1 1 1 1 m.o 1 0.0 m.m asp o o
m.m m.o_ 1 a o_ . o .z p o p
. 1 1 m._ 1 1 1 1 1 _.o 1 o.o 1 aposaa poospsou
m.o o._ 1 1 ~.o 1 1 1 1 1 _.o 1 1 p._ mapoz pootpsoo
«Ho m.p 1 1 o.o 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 _.o apoEau amsosoxu
o._ o.m 1 1 o.o 1 1 1 1 1 m.o 1 1 n.v mapoz amsosoxm
m p o a "scoop oasp:
. . 1 1 F.o 1 1 1 1 1 o.m 1 m.o o.o Aa—ozv
o N o m Laseos amsospm
. . _.mm~ o._w m.m m.~o_ psosp
m so 4 eoe tapas s_pEaa papop
do . . 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 _.o a pso La p o
11 o o p o p a s o A
o; . 1 1 1 1 1 . 1 . .
m.m¢ m.~mm 1 1 o m—N o o o o m m maposaa popop
o.o m.o 1 1 ~.o 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 _.o .ms» ow ca>o
o.o m.o 1 1 m.o 1 1 1 1 1 0.0 1 1 uo.o .mta o1o
o._ o.e 1 1 a.m 1 1 1 1 1 N.o 1 N.o a.o .mts m_1op
N.me p.NNN 1 1 a.mpo 1 1 1 1 1 N.0 1 4.0 a.“ .ats oo1a_
mapoEae As
N.mo m.om~ 1 1 _.m_ 1 1 1 1 1 ~.~m 1 m.m ~.mm_ mapoz popok
8.0 o.m 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 s._ 1 1 m._ .mts a1o
m.m _.aN 1 1 a.N 1 1 1 1 1 _.__ 1 a.o N.__ .mts m_1op
m.Ne s NON 1 1 N.ep 1 1 1 1 1 e.aa 1 0.4 N.omp .ms» oa1a_
mapoz Ao
z_p5au
op pesos: pa: asp, aopm a>ososoz aopm osopom oops osopo: coppou oocpa papppz apos pa—pp: xpcom sosoeom aNpoz posoezosu sosos ac aux»

mpopop_ aopm oapompesa

 

 

 

_ meooscoz spy sopmam mspxosw aopm
a>osmCoz asp sp ampeosapsw oosu oco sooos so ask» as Aooosoov oposamooz Lao p: cH cosos ao soppospspmpo aoosa><11pp.m moose

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.mo.o :osp mmap aco o.o mo oaeapsa matoopso
.ooso sooa op oapo>ao coso~ popop po pcaoeao mzosms
.Losop_ao asap xs oapzspspsoo poosp Losop popop mo pcaocao mxosmo

opoo xa>eom “aosoom

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

. 1 . 1 1 1 m.m _.p p._ N.@ o.u~ pope» o pcaosa
o.oo_ a.m m p m mo . . . . . . a a a
IIIIIIJIIIIIIJIII11 I p.—m_. I 1 11 m G _. m P m m OF N 06 #:QCH Loamd pouch
Aaoo_ a.pa~ m p. m e N.0 N.0 s m.o m.o a.p eat_: a o
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIInII 1 . 1 .1 1 .
N.m p.mp p.o e p m o_ . p p p
111WIIIIWIIIIJW111111111MWO 1 o.— 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 mapoEam pooepcou
N.o e._ . o._ 1 p.m 1 1 1 N.0 _.o _.o o.o a.o mapoz puospeoo
m.p m.m w.w p.o 1 m.¢ . 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 mapoEaa aocosoxm
w.” W.“ 1 N.o 1 m._ 1 1 1 o.o p.o e o m.o _._ maps: ameosuxa "tones oat_:
. 1 . 1 1 1 . . . . . a o
N.m N.m_ N.p — o o N o p N o P o m p m m A P zv eaELod amsocpm
o.mm m.pom o.o_ o.m 1 N1mNP 1 1 1 m.w N.N m.N m.~_ m.oo poocp Locos appsou popok
o.o 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.0 DEE caspo C
4 I 0 c
m ®.mm m1m©—. V.w m.O ®1mmr I I I —O I O O N O 6.0 MQFMEwn— —0UO.—1
Imuo o.o 1 1 1 0.0 1 1 1 1 1 1 m 1 .mea om La>o
Q10 C.C I I I 0.0 I I I .H I I O O I .MLX. GIO
o.o o._ s.o 1 1 _._ 1 1 1 o.o 1 1 o.o p.o .mt» m_1o_
N18m m.mo_ N.“ m.o 1 5.4m” 1 1 1 p o 1 o.o ~.o m.o .mt» oa1o_ mapoeau s5
o.~m p.mo a._ p.~ 1 4.5, 1 1 1 N.@ N.~ m.N _.N_ p.44 maps: popop
_.o N.o 1 1 1 o.o 1 1 1 1 1 1 N.o uo.o .msx o1o
e.p one u one 1 one 1 1 1 muo o.o _.o _._ e._ .mss mp1op
m._m m pm a _ a p 1 a o_ 1 1 1 m A _.N e.~ a.m_ N.Ne .mes oo1op maps: so
s_pan
am1 ass pa: sea apps oops oops pap—p: papppz
mpopoe aopm oapompssp a>oeosoz .duowdm ago—o: coppoo oospu apos apeom Eosoeom aNpoz pocosooso cosos ao aoxe

 

Amxooxeoz cps sopaam mcpzocu aopm ocoaou
asp sp ampsoeapsm oocu oso Losos co aux» xs Aooosomv oposamoo: can poocp Losos mo soppospcpmpo amoca><11mp.m msm<k

 

 

 

 

 

 

215

.mo.o :osp mmap ago o.o mo nasapca masaopsu
.ooso sooa op vapo>ao Losop _opop Lo pcaoeao wzosm

sop .po asap .3 oapzstpsou poof eosop popop mo pcaucao mzosms
m

LO

opoo aassom

 

“acesow

 

 

 

spopo» ac pcaosas

 

Coop m.pmm m.—m N.0m 1 1

 

N.Nm o.3 pst 1:53 .33
0 tot: _opo._.
_ o m c m o o o .
. . o 1 mapoEas puogpcou
w.” W.” N.0 m.c 1 1 _.o m o 1 m.o N.0 m.o m.o <.N mapox pootpsoo
m._ w. m._ v.N 1 1 N o m 1 1 1 0.0 . 1 _.o napoEas amsosuxu
c o o w o 1 1 1 e o 1 1 1 0.0 N.0 m.N mapoz amcosoxu "Logos oaspz
0.0 m.oN o.o m.m a Aa_ozv Lasso; ameoepm

pzosp Logos xppsoe popoh
DEE 16:8 3

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

o N a mapoEas popop

c o p 1 1 1 _.o 0.0 .mt» ow La>o

To mic 0.0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 —.o v.0 .mL>1 mic

N.0 m.N o.— ~.o 1 1 _.o N.0 1 1 m.o 1 —.0 ~10 .mea m_1oF

F.Nm m.NFF m.mm w.mN 1 1 m.mN m.c m.o —.o —.— m.m m1¢ o.m .wsz ow1o_ mw—oEau An

m.mm m1ww— o.mm w.m_ 1 1 o1N —.o 1 N1m m1m w.v~ N.m— m.om map»: roach

to m; we 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 to to to to a; To .

m.“ m.mN m1w m.o 1 1 00.0 v.0 1 N.0 $10 m.m N.N N.o_ 1mg» m—1o—

m.v— F.9mF o.m— m.m— 1 1 o.N n1m 1 o.m w.N m.o~ —.w~ m.oo .MLx ow1u_ mwFo: no x—pEou
.p E 83 >15 8; 8:. 8:. 02:: 8:2 .
o mammmWI mmMMImwmmmHMHMI a>osmooz otopom ocopo: :oppou oospd apos upsom Eosmsom aNpo: pzzosooso Logos mo asap

 

 

Amxooxeoz spy commas mspzosu
aopx oapompesp asp :p ampeosapsm ooso oso Losos so ao>p xs Aooosoov o_osam:o: Lao poocH Loses so coppaspspmpo amosa><11mp m wpm<p

 

 

 

 

 

216

responded by reducing the hectarage devoted to upland crops and
diverting the labor released to irrigated rice cultivation instead of
making a substantial increase in labor input. The area per adult
male of upland crops was 0.63, 0.57, and 0.48 hectares in the man-
grove, bafarg, and irrigated rice regions, respectively.

Adult labor contributed about 77.6% of the total labor on
crops in the mangrove rice region and 87.5% each in the bafarg rice
region and irrigated rice regions. The total family female labor
input on cr0ps was 32.9%, 56.8%, and 46.3% of the labor input on crops
in the mangrove, bafarg, and irrigated rice regions, respectively.
The corresponding male labor inputs accounted for 53.7%, 32.8%, and
45.2% of the total farm crop labor input, respectively.

Labor input on the crop enterprises per adult family female
was 67.3 workdays in the mangrove rice region, 68.3 workdays in the
bgfgrg rice region, and 47.0 workdays in the irrigated rice region.
The corresponding labor input per adult family male was 67.0, 43.5,
and 69.6 workdays, respectively. In general, labor input on the farm
crops per adult female was about equal, greater, and lesser than that
of males in the mangrove, bafgrg, and irrigated rice regions, respec-
tively. These results tend to show that the introduction of irrigated
rice in The Gambia increased both the absolute amount and the pr0por-
tion of male labor contributed in farming. This was expected because
irrigated rice cultivation was specifically introduced to men.

The average labor input on crops per strange farmer was 32.0,

152.0, and 104.5 workdays in the mangrove, bafaro, and irrigated rice

regions, respectively.

 

 

217

The highest labor input per crop was devoted to mangrove rice,
in the mangrove rice region, bafarg rice in the bafarg rice region,
and groundnut in the irrigated rice region. These crops accounted
for 50.2%, 65.5%, and 28.3% of the total crop labor input, respec-
tively. The combined dry and wet season irrigated rice accounted for
36.3% of the total crop labor input in the irrigated rice region.
On the whole, cash crops-~groundnut and cotton--accounted for 31.2%,
17.0%, and 32.3% of the total crop labor input in the mangrove, bafarg,
and irrigated rice regions, respectively. Upland cereals accounted
for 18.6%, 12.2%, and 22.1%, while rice accounted for 50.2%, 70.8%,

and 45.6% of the total crop labor input, respectively.

Total labor input. Table 5.14 summarizes the total labor

 

input for the three major activities of crops, off-farm, and general
farm activities for the three regions. Total labor input per house-
hold (gabada) was estimated at 601.7, 458.6, and 565.0 workdays for
the mangrove, bafarg, and irrigated rice regions, respectively. Total
family labor input accounted for 95.5% in the mangrove rice region,
93.4% in the_bafarg rice region, and 93.2% of the total labor input
in the irrigated rice region.

Farm activities accounted for 87.4%, 64.7%, and 66.8% of the
total labor input in the mangrove, bafarg, and irrigated rice regions,
respectively. The corresponding percentages for off-farm activities
are 12.6%, 35.3%, and 33.2%, respectively. The relatively higher

labor input on off—farm activities in the bafaro and irrigated rice

 

 

s,

218

mod :93 mwap aeo o.o mo oasapca maeamIo

opoo >a>§m ..auezow

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

c.8— N.mm mé m1~o 0.2: m.mm ...p 98 0.00— w1NF m.m wém Locos pope. mo pcaugam

o.mwm méwp mimw 0.5m 93v ~15— —.m m._mN 5.7.5 0.2. ~13” 7qu p39: scoop Couch

m.m— 1 «.0 ~12 —.m_. 1 0.0 _.m_ m.m; 1 0.3 Locos vast.— Fopos.

m6 1 1 m.o N; 1 1 m; V; 1 a; maFoEau pumgpcou

N6 1 N.0 06 rim 1 ed m.m m.— 0.0 ms.— wa—o: pomxpcou

oé 1 1 06 m6 1 1 mé o.m 1 o.m maFoEaL amcosuxw

mé 1 N.0 04V o.m . 1 1 9m @1m 1 o.w 3?: wmcosoxm “Leno.— v6.5.1

N.NN 1 m._ mdN N.m— 1 0.0 N.m_. 5m To o6 LwELou mucome

mémm 92: —.MN m.m_.m m6: 5:: —.m m._.oN ménm 9.3 mém e4»: Lona.— ACEom _ouo._.

N.N— 0.0 N; o._.— 0.0 1 1 0.0 To 1 1 To XZEQ Laspo Au

N.NS 06¢ 5m 06:. m.ov~ «Nu 7N w.mm_ N.m¢N Tn ed mKNN mimosa... ”much

_..0 1 1 To 0.0 1 1 01¢ m6 1 mic .mei. om La>o

m6 1 1 m.o 0.0 1 1 oo.o m.o 0.0 m6 at; m1o

m.N 1 1 m.N wé m.N 1 mé mé 1 mé .33 :10—

va 01$ 5m N.NS m.mm~ m.mm TN odo— meN _..m o.m TEN 19$ ow1m; ma—msam 3

«.mvm MUN: Nép 9mm: 9mm: mdw o.m 5mm 9me w.mw oéw m.mmm «So: 2305

my; 1 To m._. N.0 1 1 N.0 01m 1 9m .msso m1o

Tow 1 w; mAN 5w m1N 1 N6 wéw m6 N.0 7mm .mti 212

no; MUN: m4: 703 —.Fm— wdm o.m m._.m o.N0m wimm m.mw N.NQN .2» $12 mgoz «o AZEE

Eon. Ego... Eon. Esos Eon. Eons

3304 1:0 posasaw mooeu 230% 1&0 posacao Soto 333 1&0 posasaw moosu Losop so ans

common. 85 spout: sopoam aoE osopom copmam aoE a>osmso2

 

5.5.3.526 aupm we an: echo: oso 3:52 18.32 :83 so as? E Aooosoe Eosamzoz tag .39: sosos No 52:5me 12¢ ENE

 

 

 

219

regions are difficult to explain. About 11, 35, and 40 workdays per
adult were spent on off-farm activities and only about 32%, 9%, and
less than 1% of these was spent in remunerative activities in the
mangrove, bafarg, and irrigated rice regions, respectively. The only
plausible eXplanation may be related to the regions' proximity to
the urban Kombo St. Mary area. The mangrove rice region is closer to
and the irrigated rice region is farther away from the urban area.
The greater contact with the outside world in the mangrove rice
region might be resulting in a breakdown of traditional community
spirit, an increase in individualization and diminution of a feeling
of responsibility for one's fellow man (Norman, et al., 1979). Thus,
this is resulting in a reduced labor input in social and religious
activities which form the bulk of the off-farm activities. The
extent to which the labor input in off-farm activities in the bafaro
and irrigated rice regions could be tapped for productive agricultural
activities will depend on the social values attached to these off-
farm activities. If the return from agricultural production are made
higher than the perceived benefits from the religious and social activi-
ties, then there is room for large increases in agricultural production
from these regions.

The total labor input per adult family male was 97.7, 86.2,
and 137.7 workdays, while that for females was 72.1, 98.1, and 68.4
workdays for the mangrove,_bafarg, and irrigated rice regions, respec-
tively. These figures do not include labor input in livestock and

household activities. Adult family male labor input was about two

 

 

 

 

 

 

220

times that of family female labor input in the irrigated rice
regions.
Females in the bafaro rice regions generally worked more than

their counterparts in the other regions, while the same is true for

 

males in the irrigated rice regions. Whether male labor input is
higher than the female labor input will depend on the amount of labor

contributed by each sex on livestock activities and on the assumptions

 

made on household activity labor. However, the results above reveal
that adult males worked more than adult females in the mangrove and
irrigated rice regions, while females in the bafarg_rice region worked
more than men. With the sexual division of labor along crop enter-
prise 1ines, this means that intensification of rice production in

the bafarg rice regions may lead to a greater disparity in workload
between men and women, with women working more and more hours. Simi-
larly intensification of irrigated rice cultivation without a greater
participation of women may lead to men working far more than women

in the irrigated rice regions.

Seasonality of labor. Figures 5.2, 5.3, and 5.4 depict the

 

 

seasonal pattern of labor use in the mangrove, bafarg, and irrigated
rice regions, respectively. In the mangrove rice region the seasonal
pattern shows a peak in September and another in January, which corre-
sponds with the transplanting and harvesting of mangrove rice, respec-
tively. In the bafarg rice region, the peaks occur in August and
December which also corresponded with the planting and harvesting of

bafaro rice, respectively. The monthly peak periods in August/September

 

 

 

221

100 > éll:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[II] = Off-farm Activities
2 = General Farm Activities
[:1 = Farm Activities
80 L
(I0 L I

'D /

'5

.:

CU

Ln

° 31;

i’ .

3 40 t A] 9;:

C)

D.

m A

>3

’5

9

- 20 r E

l] ,
.41

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Months

 

Figure 5.2--Monthly Labor Profile per Household(

Dab d ' -
Region. _s_§_§) 1” the Mangrove Rice

 

 

222

Off-farm Activities

General Farm Activities
80

[ID
a =
D

Farm Activities

Workdays per Household

 

J F NI A M J J A S 0 N 0
Months

Figure 5.3--Monthly Labor Profile per H0US€hOId(

. Daba '
Rice Region. da) 1n the Bafaro

 

 

 

223

[ID = Off-farm Activities

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

= General Form Activities
D = Farm Activities
80 '
11.1...
00 h //
FIFT-
"U
'5 40 v
6
m
8 F :15:
3;
L
8' 20
s ' ’/«
'U
:2 J
z. 1/
52

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

J r M A M J J A S 0 N 0
Months

Figure 5.4--Monthly Labor Profile per Household(0abada) in the Irrigated
Rice Region.

 

 

 

224

and November in the irrigated rice regions correspond with the intense
weeding and harvesting periods of upland crops, respectively.

The degree of seasonality in each region can be measured by
the degree of dispersion of the monthly labor demands about a mean
monthly labor demand. This, in turn, can be approximated by the
standard deviation and for comparison purposes by the coefficient of
variation.12 The percentage coefficient of variation of the monthly
labor demands around the mean monthly labor demand for the crops and
general farm activities was 60.8%, 84.0%, and 69.9% for the mangrove,
bafaro, and irrigated rice regions, respectively. The corresponding
percentage coefficients of variation for the total labor input were
53.7%, 42.3%, and 42.7%, respectively. As expected, the relative
variability or seasonality of labor on the farm activities was highest
in the bafarg rice region which normally has a lower rainfall than the
other two regions. The Variation in monthly labor distribution was
lower when the total labor input was considered than when only the
farm labor input was considered in all regions. This indicates that
farmers in all regions undertook off-farm activities in a manner that

tended to smooth out the total monthly labor input.

The labor equation. A comparison of the monthly demand for

 

labor and the potential monthly supply of labor show that in all the

regions, the potential monthly labor supply was higher than the highest

 

12The coefficient of variation is the standard deviation
divided by the mean. This is multiplied by 100 for expression in
percentage terms.

 

 

 

 

225

labor demand. Assuming 22 days work a month and considering only
family adults, the potential monthly labor supply was estimated at
140.8 workdays for the mangrove regions, 99.0 workdays for the bafarg
region, and 103.4 workdays for the irrigated rice region. The high-
est total monthly demands on labor were 107 workdays in September,

64 workdays in August, and 76 workdays in August for the mangrove,
bafaro, and irrigated rice regions, respectively.13 Although these
figures are indicative of the monthly pattern of demand and supply

of labor in these regions, they must be interpreted with caution for

reasons indicated earlier.

Farm Equipment

 

The average number of draft animals and ox-drawn equipment
for each region are shown in Table 5.15. The seeder was the predomi-
nant farm ox-equipment in each region and the donkey was the predomi-
nant draft animal in each region. The estimated value of the equip-
ment and animals in each region was 0162 and 0554 in the mangrove rice
region, 077 and 0102 in the bafarg rice region, and 0168 and 0248 in
the irrigated rice region, respectively. The bafaro rice region was
the least capitalized among the regions and this may explain the
relatively smaller hectarage devoted to groundnut and upland cereals in
this region. Animal traction was used for an average of 77 hours,

34 hours, and 41 hours in the farm per_dabaga in the mangrove,‘bafarg,

and irrigated rice regions, respectively.

 

13See Appendix B-l for a breakdown of monthly labor demand by
regions.

 

 

 

 

 

 

226

TABLE 5.15--Average Number of Ox-drawn Equipment/Animals
Owned per Household (Dabada) by Major Type
of Rice Cultivation Region

 

 

 

 

Mangrove Bafaro Irrigated

Rice (28)a Rice (36)a Rice (26)a
Seeder (with plates) 0.86 0.44 0.88
Mouldboard Plow 0.71 0.19 0.42
Cart 0.43 0.11 0.19
Weeding Tines 0.14 0.38 0.69
Bulls 0.32 0.03 0.12
Donkeys 0.68 0.28 0.81
Horses 0.25 0.08 0.08

 

Source: Survey data

6Figures in parenthes 5 show number of Households in each region.

 

 

 

 

227

Farm Income Analysis

 

Value of Output

 

The average budgets per dabada for the three regions are
shown in Table 5.16. A breakdown of the value of output for each
crop and their relative contribution to the total value of the farm
output or gross farm income is shown in Table 5.17. The average
gross farm income per_gabaga was 02,301.51 in the mangrove rice
region, 01,505.66 in the bgfgrg rice region, and 01,505.78 in the
irrigated rice region. This is equal to 0232.48, 0238.99, and
0220.83 per person or 0793.62, 0768.19, and 0832.42 per hectare of
land in the mangrove, bafgrg, and irrigated rice regions, respectively.
The gross income per unit of labor was equal to 04.38, 05.07, and
03.99, respectively. Thus, although the irrigated rice region had
the highest gross income per hectare, this region had the lowest
gross income per unit of labor input.

The groundnut enterprise contributed about 54.2% of the
gross income in the mangrove rice region, 32.6% of the gross income

in the bafaro rice region, and 41.3% of the gross income in the

 

irrigated rice region. Upland cereals contributed 14.6%, 22.1%, and
15.9%. While rice contributed 31.2%, 45.3%, and 40.4% of the total
gross income, respectively.

The absolute amount of income derived from food crops per person
was 0106.49, 0161.03, and 0124.30 in the mangrove, bgfarg, and
irrigated rice regions, respectively. This means that the bgfarg
rice region is in a better position to satisfy its food demands from

the farm than does the other regions.

 

 

 

 

 

 

228

TABLE 5.16.--Average Household (Dabada) Farm Budget by Region

 

 

 

Mangrove Bafaro Irrigated
General Data
a. Average land holding (Ha) 2.90 1.96 1.91
b. Average family size
Male 4.9 3.0 3.6
Female 5.0 3.3 3.6
Total 9.9 6.6 7.2
c. Active family members
(10-60 years) 8.2 5.2 5.9
d. Strange farmers 0.3 0.1 0.2
e. Hours of Animal/ox-
equipment input 77 34 41
f. Number of Households 28 36 26
Income and Expenditure (0616515) (0613515) (0616515)
a. Value of farm output 2301.51 1505.66 1589.98
b. Operating expenses
Labor 8.18 47.86 19.23
Seeds 82.63 46.69 71.68
Fertilizer 17.07 0.08 1.56
Animal/ox-equipment 1.75 2.64 0.86
Irrigation/Plowing -- 28.40 105.08
Total Operating Expenses 109.63 125.67 198.41
c. Gross Margin 2191.89 1379.99 1391.57
d. Fixed Costs
Depreciation
Animals 28.00 10.00 17.00
Ox-equipment 19.00 11.00 14.00
Other hand tools 3.01 2.62 3.67
Strange Farmer 36.00 12.00 24.00
Total Fixed Costs 86.01 35.62 58.67
e. Total Costs 195.64 161.29 257.08
f. Net farm income 2105.87 1344.37 1332.90
g. Off-farm Earnings 20.66 107.05 3.67
h. Net Family Income 2126.53 1451.42 1336.57
Source: Survey data.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2229

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.mp.m op pp.m oso m.m mapsoh oso opoo Aa>e=m Sosa oa>psaa ”aosoom
o.oop o.oop o.oop m~.mmmp o.oo~ o.ooH o.oop oo.momp o.ooH o.ooH o.ooH pm.pomN ms<pop
o.¢ p.m o.N mm.mm 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 coppoo
o.mc m.NN o.o¢ mo.Neo N.oN o.mm m.mo mm.omm N.om m.mN N.pm pm.mpm apps Fopop
n.0N m.mn N.m~ mN.HeN .mum mflmm 5.9 mm.oop 11 11 11 11 oapompgsp somoam pa:
o.op v.m m.0N mm.mNm m.p o.p o.p o¢.mN 11 11 11 11 oapompesp :omoam sea

11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 N.om m.mN N.Hm mm.mpn aopm a>ocmsoz

11 11 11 11 m.mo 0.0m o.Nm p¢.omm 11 11 11 11 aopm osoeom
m.o o.m N.e m¢.mN 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 apps osopo:
H.NN p.NN o.mp em.NmN N.NH m.om p.NN mo.mmm o.mp N.oN m.ap mo.mmm mpowsxoocopo: _opo»
N.0 m.o N.0 m¢.N 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 Amwgmummwov ov:_m
N.m o.p o.o mo.mp m.m N.N p.o mN.Nm 11 11 11 11 pa—ppz onsomv apos
N.p o.p m.o p¢.v p.p m.m o.p mm.mN m.mp N.mN m.mp no.mpm papppz Aossmv apeom
o.m H.¢p o.m N¢.mNp H.H N.m m.¢ om.pN 11 11 11 11 Eososom
o.m o.o m.m mm.mop N.o m.op m.pp mo.mmp m.p o.p m.o mm.ON aNpoz
m.mN o.po m.p¢ o.omm o.mp m.NN o.Nm Np.pme N.pm o.mq N.om NN.N¢Np pososooso

eosos p ooos R & on pesos< sosos a osos p a Any psooe< Losos a osos a a Any pozoe<
anocH anosH asoosp

Egon po aosaom

atom ao aocoom

 

Esoa 4o aosoom

 

oas< apps oapompsep

oae< aopm osopom

oas< apps a>osmsoz

 

soppo>pppzu apps so asap sowoz ms

mpooosoov oposamoo: Laos

nose sooN so» now: sosos oso osos amopsaosas oso aeoosp snos so maoszom11.~p.m Nsm<p

 

 

 

230

Table 5.17 also gives the percentage of land and labor used
by each crop enterprise. A close examination of these percentages
reveals that in all regions the percentage of income from groundnut
is either almost equal to or greater than the percentage of land and
labor devoted to this crop. In the case of upland cereals the per-
centage of income derived from these crops is lower than the percentage
of land devoted to these crops and only in the bafaro rice region is
the percentage of income higher than the percentage of labor allocated
to these crops. The percentage of income received from the rice
enterprises in all regions is higher than the percentage of land used
in their cultivation but lower than the percentage of labor devoted to
their cultivation.

The percentages on the upland cereals tend to support the
earlier speculation that each region is tending toward a specializa-
tion in one upland cereal. Both the percentage of gross income
received and the percentages of land and labor utilized among the
upland cereals are highest in early (sung) millet in the mangrove rice
region, maize in the_bafarg rice region, and sorghum in the irrigated

rice region.

Operating Costs and Gross Margin

 

The average operating costs per dabada_were estimated at
0109.63, 0125.67, and 0198.41 in the mangrove, bafarg, and irrigated
rice regions, respectively. Labor accounted for 7.5%, 38.1%, and
9.8% of the total operating costs, while seed accounted for 75.4%,

37.2%, and 36.1% of the total operating costs in the mangrove, bafarg,

 

 

 

 

231

and irrigated rice regions, respectively. The highest contributors to
the operating costs were seed in the mangrove rice region, labor in
the bafarg rice region, and irrigation and plowing in the irrigated
rice region. Irrigation and plowing costs alone accounted for about
53% of the operating expenses in the irrigated rice region.

The operating ratios were estimated at 0.05, 0.09, and 0.17
in the mangrove, bafarg, and irrigated rice regions, respectively.

The gross margins per gabgga_were estimated at 02,191.89,
01,379.99, and 01391.57 or 0755.82, 0704.08, and 0728.57 per hectare
for the mangrove, bafarg, and irrigated rice regions, respectively.
The corresponding gross margins per workday of farm labor input were
04.17, 04.65, and 03.69, respectively. Although the bafarg rice
region had the lowest gross margin per hectare, it had the highest

gross margin per unit of farm labor input.

Fixed Costs

 

Fixed costs were estimated at 086.01 for the mangrove rice
region, 035.62 for the bafgrg rice region, and 058.67 for the irrigated
rice region. The strange farmer was the highest fixed cost item in
all the three regions. The fixed ratios were 0.04, 0.02, and 0.04 in
the mangrove, bafarg, and irrigated rice regions, respectively. This
means that in each of the regions, no dabagg spent more than 00.04 in
fixed expenses for each dalasis of gross income generated on the

average.

 

 

 

232

Total Costs

 

Total costs per dabada were highest for the irrigated rice
region and lowest for the bafarg rice region. Total costs were
0195.61, 0161.29, and 0257.08 corresponding to gross ratios of 0.09,
0.11, and 0.16 for the mangrove, bafaro, and irrigated rice regions,

respectively.

Net Farm Income

 

The net farm income in each region was poistive. The highest
net farm income per_gabaga was in the mangrove rice region with an
average of 02,105.87. The lowest net farm income was obtained in the
irrigated rice growing area with an average of 01,332.90 per dabada,
The bafarg rice region had an average net farm income per dabada of
01,344.37. Since no interest was paid on capital in all the regions
the net farm income was equal to net farm earnings.

Net farm earnings per person were equal to 0212.71, 0213.39,
and 0185.13 or 0726.16, 0685.90, and 0697.85 per hectare of land in
the mangrove,_bafarg, and irrigated rice growing regions, respectively.
Net farm earnings per workday of farm family labor was 04.22, 05.04,
and 03.93 in the mangrove, bafarg, and irrigated rice regions, respec-
tively. Land productivity was highest in the mangrove rice region,
while family labor productivity was highest in the bgfarg rice

region.

Return to Family Labor and Manggement

 

Assuming a 15% interest charge on capital and a 0400.00 per

hectare opportunity cost of irrigated land, the net return to family

 

 

 

 

233

labor and management was estimated at 02,076.52, 01,280.18, and
01,146.34 per dabada in the mangrove, bafaro, and irrigated rice
region, respectively. This is equivalent to 04.16, 04.80, and 03.38

per workday of family labor input in the farm, respectively.

Net Family Earnings

 

Net family earnings is the sum of net farm earnings plus off-
farm earnings. Average offefarm earnings per household (gagggg) were
equal to 020.66, 0107.05, and 03.67 or 0.9%, 6.6%, and 0.2% of the
total gross income for the mangrove, bgfgrg, and irrigated rice regions,
respectively. The total net family earnings per ggbggg were 02,126.53,
01,451.42, and 01,336.37, respectively. This means that the estimated
income available for all purposes per person was 0214.80, 0230.38, and
0185.63 for the mangrove, bgfgrg, and irrigated rice regions, respec-
tively. The milled rice equivalent, at 1982 retail consumer prices,
of these incomes are 272, 292, and 235 kilograms of rice per capita for
the mangrove, bgjgrg, and irrigated rice regions, respectively. Assum-
ing that all calorie intake is satisfied from rice, then to maintain
a minimum per capita intake of 182.5 kilograms of cereals, farmers
would have to spend 69.1%, 62.5%, and 77.7% of their disposable income
on food purchases in the mangrove, bgjgrg, and irrigated rice regions,
respectively. Even if land is assumed to have zero opportunity cost,
farmers in the irrigated rice region would still have to spend about

70% of their income on rice.

 

 

234

In Table 5.17 the proportion of income received from food
crops is 45.8% in the mangrove rice region, 67.4% in the bgfgrg rice
region, and 56.3% in the irrigated rice region. The proportion of
disposable income required to maintain a minimum calorie intake and
the proportion of gross income received from food crops are not entirely
comparable becaue the first is based on net returns while the latter is
based cuigross returns. They are, however, indicative of the relative
positions of these regions. The figures show that both the mangrove
and irrigated rice regions will have to buy food from outside in order
to satisfy the minimum calorie intake requirement. In the bgfgrg
regions, farmers are likely to meet their minimUm requirements from
the cereals produced on the farm.

In summary, the above discussions have shown the differences
in farm organization and farm income when the sample villages were
divided into three regions based on the predominant rice cultivation
system in each village.

The results reveal that groundnut cultivation formed a sig-
nificant part of the farming system in all three regions, although in
the ggfgrg region, bgfgrg rice seemed to be replacing groundnut as
the major income earner. A close look at the upland cereals showed a
tendency for each region to specialize in one upland cereal. Speciali-

zation in early (suno) millet cultivation in the mangrove rice region

 

 

235

is almost complete. In the bgfgrg rice region, the evidence showed a
direction toward specializing in maize whereas in the irrigated rice
region, the direction was toward specializing in sorghum.

The average labor input per adult on the farm varied between
56 and 67. Female adults put in more time in the crop enterprises
than did males in the bgfgrg rice region, while the opposite was true
in the irrigated rice region. Adult male and female labor input in
the farm crops was about equal in the mangrove rice region. There
seemed to be evidence that the introduction of irrigated rice increased
male labor input in the farm. Total labor input per adult male was
higher than the labor input of females in the mangrove and irrigated
rice regions, while total female labor input was higher than that of
males in the bgjgrg rice region.

Total net farm earnings per person were lowest in the irrigated
rice region and were about equal in the bgfarg_and mangrove rice
regions. Farmers in the bgfgrg_rice region are more likely to meet
their minimum food or calorie intake requirements from cereals pro-
duced on the farm than do fanners in other regions.

The Influence of Size of Land Holding on Farm Organization
and Farm Income

 

 

The main objective of this section is to study the effect of
the size of land holding on the organization of the farm and level of
farm income. More specifically, this section will examine the rela-
tionship between the size of land area cultivated in the year of the

survey and resource endowment and utilization, the composition of

 

 

 

236

crops cultivated and their contribution to gross farm income, and the
degree to which subsistence requirements are met from the farm output.
To achieve these objectives,'UNasample population was divided
into three land size categories. In making this division, medium
farmers included all those who fell within plus or minus one standard
deviation of the total mean hectarage. Small farmers included those
who fell below that range and large farmers included those who fell

above that range.

Resource Use

 

Land

 

Table 5.18 presents the area of land devoted to each crop
and its relative contribution to the total land holding for all the
three size categories. The average total hectarage cultivated was
0.65 hectares, 2.17 hectares, and 4.30 hectares for the small, medium,
and large farmers, respectively. Both the absolute value and the per—
centage devoted to groundnut increased with an increase in size of land
holding. Small farmers devoted 27.7% of their land area to groundnut
while medium and large farmers used 35.9% and 51.9% of their land
holdings for groundnut cultivation, respectively.

Although there was an increase in the absolute number of
hectares devoted to upland cereals and rice with an increase in size
of land holding, the relative hectarage of these crops declined with
an increase in size. The area devoted to upland cereals was 0.22,

0.61, and 1.02 hectares per dabada for the small, medium, and large

farmers, respectively. 'Their corresponding percentage of the total

 

 

 

237

wasps 1o mpoo spsppz a1a3 mmspopos amosz amosp ppo aooposp op 01a51o

a1a3 moposamno: .oso1m aNpm sooa sp moposaaoos so sassos asp zosm mp

 

.masopoas moo.o sosp amass

.apoEom popop asp so ospopos soae asp mo soppop>ao osoosopm aso

a Espeae ospsop 00 oaopspo
maspsasoo sp masompao

 

 

 

 

.opoo xa>1om ”ao1oom
0.000 00.0 0.000 NH.N 0.00p 00.0 pepcp
0.p 00.0 0.0 00.0 0.0 N0.0 00pm 000_00
1.0 00.0 0.0 00.0 N.0 00.0 0010 oape0p110 000000 pa:
0.0 00.0 0.N 00.0 0.0 00.0 00pm 000000110 000000 s10
0.1 00.0 p.00 00.0 0.0m op.0 acp1 010100
n.0p 00.0 p.pp 0N.o 11 11 aops a>o1msoz
11 11 0.0 No.0 11 11 soppoo
11 11 0.0 000.0 11 11 Aap1app0pev 00001
0.0 00.0 N.0 00.0 0.00 00.0 aopos
N.0 00.0 0.5 No.0 0.0 00.0 5000100
N.0 00.0 N.0 “0.0 0.00 00.0 papppz sapamms apes
o.mp om.o H.HH om.o 11 11 pap_pz Ammmms xpsom
0.p0 00.0 0.00 0s.0 N.NN 0p.0 .000000010
s Aozv oa1< s Aosv oa1< s onv oa1<
oosu

 

 

 

asmps 00100

aseos 00000:

aseps ppaem

mspo—o: ocos ao aNpm so oosu soom op oapo>ao Aooosoov oposamzos 1aa oa1< aoo1a><11.wp.m msmqp

 

 

 

238

land area were 33.8%, 31.3%, and 23.7%, respectively. Similarly, the
average areas devoted to rice per dabada were 0.25, 0.73, and 1.05
hectares and the corresponding percentages were 38.5%, 31.9%, and
24.4% for the small, medium, and large farmers, respectively.

The total average area cultivated per person was 0.11 hec-
tares for small farmers, 0.21 hectares for medium farmers, and 0.57
hectares for large farmers. The area devoted to food crops per person
was 0.08 hectares, 0.13 hectares, and 0.27 hectares for the small,
medium, and large farmers, respectively. The total area cultivated
per adult family member was 0.17, 0.32, and 0.80 hectares for small,

medium, and large farmers, respectively.

Labor

Family size and composition. A breakdown of the size of

 

labor force by type, sex, and age for each size category is shown in
Table 5.19. The medium farmers had the highest number of persons with
an average of 10.3 per dabada, Small and large farmers had an average
of 6.0 and 7.6 persons per dabada, respectively. In all cases the
number of females was either equal to or larger than males. The
percentage of the adult population, 16 to 60 years old was 42.4%,
66.0%, and 68.4% for the small, medium, and large farmers, respectively.
Small farmers had no stranger farmers. The average number of strange

farmers for the medium and large farmers was 0.3 and 0.2, respectively.

Work on the farm. Tables 5.20, 5.21, and 5.22 show a break-

 

down of the labor input on the farm by type of labor, sex, age, and

 

 

 

.00.0 0000 00000

.000o0000o; 0o 0005:: 3o00 00000pco000 00 00005020

.mpmo 0w>0zm "oo00om

 

 

239

 

N.0 m.o 11 0005000 00:00pm

0.0 0.00 0.0 000000 00000

m.m 0.0 m.m 0000500 Pwpoh

0.0 0.0 0.0 00000 010

0.0 0.0 0.0 00000 00100

0.0 0.0 0.0 00000 00100

00.0 m.o 11 00000 om 00>o 0000000

0.0 0.0 0.0 00002 00000

0.0 0.0 0.0 00000 010

m.o 0.0 0.0 00000 00100

0.0 0.0 0.0 00000 00100 00000
00000 00000 00000 000002 00000 00000 00000 00 000p

 

 

0000000 0000
0:00 00 000 0o000 0o 0000 00 50000000 oFogomsoI 000 00o0000 0o 000502 0000o><11.mp.m m0m<0

 

240

 

.mo.o cusp 0000 000 o.o 00 000mpcm 0000000u
oo0o zumw op umpo>oo 0ono~ papop mo pcou0wa mzosmo
.0ooop 0o 000p 0900 00 omponm0pcou poacp 0oaop pmpop 0o pcwu0mn mzocmo

upmo xw>0sm "mu0aom

 

11 o.oo0 0.00 0.o0 11 0.00 0.0 11 11 0.0 11 0.0 0.0 0.o~ 000pop 0o p000000
0.000 0.000 0.00 0.00 11 0.00 0.0 11 11 0.00 11 0.0 0.00 0.00 p0000 00000 0000p
n1m o.o 0.0 m.0 11 0.0 m.o 11 11 o.o 11 11 m.o w.o 00300 um00: —op00
o.o o.o 11 11 11 o.o 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 00—0200 p000pcoo
0.0 N.0 0.0 0.0 11 0.0 ~.o 11 11 0.0 11 11 11 ~.o 0000: po00pooo
0.0 0.0 0.o 0.o 11 11 0.o 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 0000200 000000xm
o.o 0.0 11 11 11 ~.o 11 11 11 11 11 11 0.o o.o 0000: moc0coxm

“0o000 0000:

11 11 11 11 11 11 11 000—02V 000000 00000p0

 

 

 

0.00 o.0o~ 0.00 ~.o~ 11 o.00 0.0 11 11 o.00 11 0.0 0.00 0.00 paocp 00000 000000 p0pop
0.0 0.00 o.0 0.0 11 11 11 11 11 0.0 11 11 ~.o N.0 000500 000po .o
o.mm w.qn w.op o.m 11 m.mm m.m 11 11 m.o 11 11 o.o o.o mmpmewm —mp00
o.o o.o 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 Uo.o 00000 ow 0m>o
0.o ~.o 0.0 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 0.0 11 00000 010
0.0 0.0 0.0 11 11 0.0 0.0 11 11 11 11 11 0.0 0.0 00000 00100
0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 11 0.00 0.0 11 11 0.0 11 11 0.0 0.0 00000 00100 0000000 .0
0.00 0.000 0.0N 0.o0 11 0.0 0.0 11 11 0.00 11 0.0 0.00 0.o0 00002 0000»
~.o 0.o 0.o 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 0.0 11 00000 010
N.0 0.0 0.0 11 11 0.0 11 11 11 0.0 11 0.0 0.0 0.0 00000 00100
N.Nm m.mop o.p~ m.op 11 p.m m.m 11 11 v.00 11 0.0 m.mp m.0m 000mm oo1mp 00002 .0
000000
pcmu000 peso pm: 00o
0 E< oupm IWMVM1 oopm copuoo oocpu pepppz popppz Ezza0om «~00: pococoo0w 0o000 0o 0000

o>o0m=02 o0000m 00000: op00 000mm

0.0pop oo_m omp000000

 

 

A000ox0o3 :00 0005000 Ppmem110000000pcw oo0u 000 0o000 0o 000p 00 00000090 opocm0zo: 000 page“ 0oo00 0o 0o0p0000p00o mam0m><11.o~.m m0m<p

 

 

 

 

.mo.o 0000 000— 000 o.o 00 0000000 00000000
.0000 0000 00 0000>00 0000— F000» 00 0000000 030000
.0000_ 00 0000 0000 00 00000 00000 00000 00 0000000 0300m0

000a 00>0zm ”000:0m

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
11. 0.000 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 03000 00 0.000000
0.000 0.N0m 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0m 0.00 0.00 0.N0 00000 00000 00000
0.0 0.00 0.o 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11 N.0 m.o 0.0 m.o N.0 00000 0000: 00000
0.0 0.0 N.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11 11 . 11 0.0 11 0.0 11 0000500 00000000
0.0 m.0 N.0 o.o 0.0 m.~ o.o 0.0 11 0.0 0.0 0.0 m.o o.~ 00002 «0000000
N.0 . 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11 11 11 11 0.0 11 0.0 0000500 0mc0cuxm
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 N.0 11 0.0 11 0.0 N.0 0.0 N.0 0.0 00_02 00:000xm
”00000 0000:
1
W... 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 00005 0000000 0000000
0.00 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 00000 00000 000500 00000
0.0 o.~ o.o o.o 11 11 11 o.o 11 0.0 m.o 0.o N.0 0.0 000500 00000 .0
00.0 0.00: ml: ~.m 06m 0.09 o.m .c.o n.o o.o 0.0 «0.0 m0 06 0305000 Page»
0.0 0.0 11 11 0.0 0.0 11 11 11 11 11 11 0.0 0.0 00000 00 00>o
0.0 N.0 0.0 11 0.0 o.o 11 11 11 11 0.0 11 o.o 0.0 00000 010
0.0 0.0 0.0 o.o 0.0 0.0 o.o 0.0 11 o.o 0.0 11 0.0 0.0 00000 m0100
0.00 0.000 0.00 N.0 0.0m 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 00000 00100 00_0E00 .0
0.00 0.000 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 00002 00000
0.0 0.0. ..0 11 0.0 0.0 11 11 11 0.0 0.0 11 0.0 0.0 00000 010
m.m 900 06 m.o m.o N.0 00.0 0.0 11 N.0 N..N 0.0 N.0 0.0 00000. 2100
0.0m 0.000 0.m 0.0 0.m N.0 m.o 0.~ 11 w.0 o.0~ 0.0 0.m0 o.N0 00000 00100 00_0z .0
0:000
0000000 uczoe< 002 00a
0 0000 000: 00.1 000—02 00__Fz
. . . 00000 0 c0 . . E: 000 0N0 0
000000 0000 000000000 0>00000z 000000 0:0_0= o 0 0 0000 00000 0 m .02 0 0000000 00000 00 0000
000000003 :00 0005000 500002110000000000 0000 0:0 00000 00 0000 00 Ammmmmmv 0_000000: 000 00000 00000 00 000000000000 00000><11.0m.m m0m<0

 

 

 

242

 

 

.mo.o cusp mmmH mgm o.o mm vwgmpcm mmgsm_uu
.aogu numm o» umuo>mu gonaH Have» we ucmugma mzonmn
.Loan we max“ cumm an psacw Loan Houou we acmugwa mzocmm

sumo Am>gzm ”mugzom

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

o.ooH m.c m.~ o.mn q.~H o.~ uu nn N.0 m.m o.H m.m m.m~ apmuoh we ucwugwa
92: 980 0.8 92 ad: WE 0.2 nu nu H.H «6m H: 0.8 H.~: SSH 3%.. H38
o6 «.2 m6 «4 H.N m6 H.o un nu nn To o.o io H3 LBS 8:: H38
nu uu uu nu un nu nu nu un nu nu un nu un moHosmu uuogucou
¢.o e.~ o.o un nu nu nn uu nu nu nu nu nu o.~ memz gumLucoo
n.H o.o m.o ~.H H.0 m.m H.o uu nu uu nu uu nu un mmHmEmu mucosuxm
m.H o.“ nu uu o.~ o.n nu un nu nn ~.o o.o «.0 m.H mwpaz wmcmzuxw
"LonoH umLH:
m.o m.mm o.m un m.o m.H~ un uu un o.H m.H nu m.q m.o Hmmpozv LoELmu mmcmgum
n.oo m.Hmm o.m~ m.mH o.mH~ ~.mq a.mH nu nn H.0 ¢.wq m.a H.mH N.HoH usacH Loam; AHvEmm HMHOH
o.o ~.o nu uu ~.o nu uu nu nn nu nn uu uu un AHHEmm gmzuo .u
oHHm NHon m.- m.~H nflmoH m.aq ~.mH nu uu uu «.o o.~ H.m H.mH mmHmEmu Houop
H.o M.o Hm uu N.0 un uu un nu un un nu H.0 H.o mgmma om gw>o
3 9m m. -u no -u u- u- u- -- u- -- u- u- as: E
m.om o.n0m .o . m.~ mu mu nu un uu «.0 uu uu «.0 mumma mHnoH
N 2 m 2 N NE m .3 N 2 nu un nu nn o.~ o.m Ni 29% 8an 3:58 A.
Mumn WHMQN Hhm mww ouow ~.o N.0 un nu H.0 o.mq ~.~ o.NH o.qu memz Hnuoh
q.< o.- nu un M.“ un nn nu nu cum o.o nu m.o H.~ mgmmx muo
. . uu nu nu nu . q.q uu o.N o.oH mgmmz mHnoH
a v D I O U a I
m cm m oHN H m m H m QH N o N o nu uu H o o m¢ N.“ N.m m.mNH mgmmx omnoH mmHmz .m
3.2::
pcwugma uczoe< um: Ago
a 8; 8.; 8.; :8 o o E “2:: fizz:
m>ogmcmz ogm»mm uccHQ: H u u .u wpwH xHLmu Eagmgom mNHmz uncucaogo Loan mo maxk

wrench wupm umgmm_LLH

 

m un
A Amuxgoz cHV mLEmgmm mmLoH mmwgqgmucm aogu ucm Loan mo maxh An Hmnognov uHozmmsoI Log “sacH LoDMH Ho coHuanLHmHo mmmgm><nu.~m.m mHm<H

 

 

243

 

crop enterprise for the smaTT, medium, and Targe farmers, respectiveTy.
TotaT Tabor input per dabada on the crop enterprises was 209.9 work
days for the smaTT farmers, 362.4 work days for the medium farmers,
and 608.0 work days for the Targe farmers. This is equivaTent to
Tabor inputs per hectare of 322.9, 167.0, and 141.4 work days, respec—
tiveTy. This shows a decTine in Tabor input per hectare as the size
of Tand honing increases and is consistent with findings by Norman
(1973) and Kamuanga (1983).

The percentage of Tabor contributed by famiTy members decTined
from 96.7% for smaTT farmers to 91.6% for medium farmers to 90.7% for
Targe farmers. The resuTts are consistent with expectations because
the area cuTtivated per aduTt increased with an increase in the size
of Tand honing. SmaTT farmers were abTe to suppTy most of their farm
Tabor demands from their famiTy Tabor source, whiTe Targer farmers
had to empToy nonfamiTy Tabor in order to satisfy the totaT farm
Tabor demand especiaTTy in the peak season. Strange farmers con-
tributed 3.8% and 6.3% of the totaT crop Tabor input in the medium
and Targe farms, respectiveTy. Other nonfamiTy Tabor contributed
3.3%, 4.6%, and 3.0% of the totaT crop Tabor input in the smaTT,
medium, and Targe farmers, respectiveTy.

Of the totaT Tabor input on crops, famiTy maTes contributed
54.6%, 45.6%, and 39.7% in the smaTT, medium, and Targe farmers,
respectiveTy. FamiTy femaTes, on the other hand, contributed 35.6%,
45.4%, and 51.0%, respectiveTy. Chderen fifteen years and beTow

accounted for 3.5%, 6.7%, and 5.7% of the Tabor input on crops in the

 

 

 

 

244

 

smaTT, medium, and Targe farmers, respectiveTy. Labor input per aduTt
maTe in the crop enterprises was 57.8, 48.0, and 84.2 work days,

whiTe femaTe aduTts Tabor input was 38.1, 42.5, and 113.3 work days for
the smaTT, medium, and Targe farmers, respectiveTy. Both the reTa—
tive contribution and absoTute amount of Tabor input tend to indicate
that femaTe Tabor on the farm crops becomes increasingTy important as
the size of Tand honing increases. This impTies that Tand extensive
deveTopment technoTogies, which encourage the expansion of Tand area
cuTtivated may Tead to adverse effects on women in The Gambia as their
work Toads are increased.

The percentage of Tabor contributed by famiTy femaTes on
upTand cr0ps increased with an increase in the size of Tand area
cuTtivated whereas the percentage of Tabor contributed by famiTy maTes
on the rice enterprises decreased with an increase in the size of
Tand area cuTtivated. FamiTy femaTes contributed 1.6%, 4.4%, and
7.8% of the Tabor input on upTand crops whiTe famiTy maTes contributed
31.5%, 12.2%, and 7.3% of the Tabor input on the rice enterprises for
the smaTT, medium, and Targe farmers, respectiveTy. FamiTy femaTe's
Tabor input on the cash crops aTone was 0.7%, 2.4%, and 5.4% of the
totaT Tabor input on upTand crops. Thus, as the Tand area cuTtivated
increases and as the emphasis shifts to commerciaT agricuTture, women
increase their participation in upTand crop production. At the same
time, maTe participation on rice cuTtivation is decreased.

SmaTT farmers devoted 20.3% of their totaT crop Tabor input

on groundnuts, 18.7% on upTand cereaTs,and 61.0% on rice. Medium

 

 

 

245

farmers devoted 25.6% of their Tabor on groundnut, 19.3% on upTand
cereaTs, and 53.5% on rice. The corresponding percentages for the
Targe farmers were 28.3%, 13.4%, and 58.3%, respectiveTy. The Tabor
distribution on these crop categories was simiTar for aTT three size
groups. However, smaTT farmers devoted a greater percentage, 79.7%
on food crop production than did medium farmers with 72.8% and Targe

farmers with 71.7%.

TotaT Tabor input. A summary of the totaT Tabor input by
type of Tabor, sex, and major type of activity is shown in TabTe 5.23.
TotaT Tabor input per dabada was estimated at 410.7 work days for
smaTT farmers, 509.7 work days for medium farmers, and 809.4 work days
for Targe farmers. The percentage of totaT Tabor devoted to crops
increased with an increase in the size of Tand honing whiTe that
devoted to off-farm activities decreased with an increase in size of
Tand honing. The percentages of Tabor input in the farm were 55.3%,
74.7%, and 79.6% and that on off-farm activities was 44.7%, 25.3%,
and 20.4% for smaTT, medium, and Targe farmers, respectiveTy. 0f the
totaT Tabor input on off-farm activities, smaTT farmers devoted 8. %
of it on remunerative activities, whiTe medium and Targe farmers devoted
6.2% and 2.4% of it on remunerative activities. Two concTusions are
apparent from the above figures. The first is that as the size of
Tand honing increases, farmers devote more of their time on farm
activities than on off-farm activities. This is because the increased
Tand size requires more Tabor for cuTtivation. The second is that as

the Tand size honing increases, farmers devote Tess of their off—farm

 

246

 

 

.36 55 33 PE o.o me 3:35 35min

3mm 35% ”wugzom

 

 

o.ooH <.o~ .Hé H.m~ o.ooH m.m~ o8 H.Hn 0.02 N..} N3 H.Hm Fmpop mo ucmugwa

{mom «.9: 06m 058 Taom 9me .H.wH {mom “.03 0.3: ~.: 0.03 “:35 Long Each

N4: uu uu 2: mg: nu ma “.2 N.“ nu ma o.o 233 8:: H35

nn nn nu un 9H nn nn o.H o.o nn un o.o 335mm pumbcoo

....N un nn o.~ o.o nu H.o m6 mé un n6 N..» 3;: 395:3

o.m nu I o.m m3 nn nn mi «H nn nn TH 3225“. wmcecuxm

ofi nu nn wé Ni nn H.0 H..H m.H nn nn n.H 3E: mmcmzuxm
.833 wot:

mdm nu nn Tum m4: nu ad 52 nn nn un In 3.53. wmcmcum

TN: «.moH 06m mHmm m6: «6.me <3: o.~mm m.mo.H 9me a4: oéom Long ACES HSOH

N.0 un nn «.0 H.~ nu H.0 o.~ mi: nu n.H 9: 3.55m .650 .0

Hit” 0.3 o.m ~.on ~.mo~ HAM <4» ~33 ~.HwH “LIE. o.o mém $3.5“. Each

To nn nn «.0 H.0 nn o.o H.0 o.o nu un Awo.o new; ow :96

m6 nu nu ma N.0 uu uu N.0 N.0 uu uu N.0 28» o-o

N.» 83 nu ma .2 to o.o o5 N.~ uu uu ~.~ 28x mHuoH

flown 08 9m 8.8m «.82 5: to .13 new: mi mg» 3.2 2%; 8-3 mmHEfl .a

9.1m m.ooH 06m H.H.HN 053 mém o.oH m.moH {RN HéoH Tm wéHH 3;: H38.

w.n nn nn o6 mH nn nn m.H «.0 nn nn .H.o mgmwx muo

N.Nm m3 m.o 0.3 m.HN H.H o.o «v.9 m4» nn m.o 06 Emma mHuoH

m.mmm w.mm N.Nm dem maem 5mm 93 H.H}H H.~N~ H.HHoH v5 9%: 23» owuoH 33:» .m

HHEmd
HES FEE EE EE ES 58
a L m o 30; m o 38.
H38 uto 7:6:ch o u H u p uto H288 u H u .H uto H238 u .253 we 25
mm... 2 5382 2me

 

H3333; e: 8.201 2.3 t 8.; e; 52.52 8.22 :83 co 8: 3 Hllmezme

39326: .55 “:9: LBS mo :oHuanum.5un.m~.m 5m:

247

activity time on remunerative activities. This may be due to the fact

that Targe farmers are abTe to acquire most of their subsistence needs
from the farm, whiTe smaTT farmers must take income earning off-farm
empToyment to suppTement their farm earnings.

TotaT famiTy Tabor input accounted for about 98.2%, 93.8%,
and 93.0% of the totaT Tabor input in smaTT, medium, and Targe farmers,

respectiveTy. The rest was contributed by strange farmers and other

nonfamiTy Tabor.
In aTT size groups men contributed a greater percentage of

the Tabor in generaT and off-farm activities than did women. More

than anything eTse, the Tow rate of women participation in nonfarm

activities may be due to the traditionaT secTusion of women in MusTim

societies, aTthough in The Gambia this secTusion is not very rigid,

pTus the fact that househon activities which are the domain of women

were not incTuded in this anaTysis. TotaT Tabor input per aduTt

famiTy maTe was 116.9, 83.3, and 135.5 work days, whiTe the totaT Tabor

input per aduTt famiTy femaTe was 83.6, 52.5, and 136.7 work days for

the smaTT, medium, and Targe farmers, respectiveTy. In generaT, Tabor

input per aduTt was highest in the Targe farmers and Towest in the

medium farmers. MaTe Tabor input was higher than that of femaTes in

the smaTT and medium farmers, but was about equaT in the Targe farm-
ers.

SeasonaTity of Tabor. Figures 5.5, 5.6, and 5.7 depict the

histograms for the totaT monthTy Tabor input per dabada for the

smaTT, medium, and Targe farmers, respectiveTy. ATT three size groups

248

HI] = Off-farm ActiviLios

'j‘ = GeneraT Farm Activities
80 ' [:1 = Farm Activities
60

Wonkdavs pen Househon
.'>
C‘

 

 

 

 

J r M A M J J A s o N '0
Months

Figure 5.5--MonthTy Labor ProfiTe per Househon(Dabada) of SmaTT Farmers.

 

249

HI] = Off-farm Activities
32 = Genera] Farm Activities

[:1 = Farnnn Activities
80?

60. E

Horkdays pen HousenoT
5
O

20.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

J F M A 7M J J A s o N 0
Months

Figure 5.6—-MonthTy Labor ProfiTe per Househon(Dabada) of Medium Farmers.

 

250

   
   

120 [[1] = Off-farm Activities

'11.
D

GeneraT Farm Activities

Farm Activities

TOO

 

80

60

 

Workdays per Househoid

4O

20

J F M A M J J A S 0 Ii 0
Months

Figure 5.7-~MonthTy Labor ProfiTe per Househon(O_a_b_a_da_) of Large Farmers.

 

 

 

251

show a peak in monthTy Tabor demand in either August or September.
The highest totaT monthTy Tabor demand for smaTT farmers was in the
month of August which accounted for about 11% of the totaT Tabor
demand. For medium and Targe farmers, the month of September had
the highest monthTy Tabor demand accounting for about 14.1% and 16.4%
of the totaT Tabor demand, respectiveTy. The months of August in
smaTT farmer and September in medium and Targe farmers coincide
with periods of intensive weeding of upTand crops and transpTanting
of rice, respectiveTy.

The coefficient of variation about the mean monthTy demand
for the farm activities was 61.0%, 66.0%, and 55.0% for the smaTT,
medium, and Targe farmers, respectiveTy. The corresponding coeffi-
cients of variation about the mean monthTy totaT Tabor demand was 21.0%,
43.0%, and 45.0%, respectiveTy. There appeared to be no reTationship
between the size of Tand honing and the seasonaTity of Tabor in farm
activities. However, variation in totaT Tabor input increased with
an increase in size of Tand honing. Labor input in off—farm activi-
ties was carried out in a manner that tended to even out the totaT
monthTy Tabor fTuctuations. This is evident in the Tower coefficients

of variation for the totaT Tabor input than the farm Tabor input.

The Tabor eguation. The amount of Tabor surpTus and deficit,
notwithstanding reservations made earTier, can be estimated from the
potentiaT Tabor suppTy and the totaT Tabor demand. Assuming a 22-day
work week, the potentiaT aduTt monthTy Tabor suppTy in smaTT, medium,

and Targe farmers was 83.6 work days, 149.6 work days, and 114.4

 

 

 

252

work days per dabada, respectiveTy. The totaT monthTy Tabor demand for
smaTT and medium farmers were aTT beTow the potentiaT monthTy Tabor
suppTy for aTT months.14 The highest totaT monthTy Tabor demands

for smaTT and medium farmers were in the months of August and Septem—
ber which had totaT demands of 45 and 72 workdays, respectiveTy.

For Targe farmers the month of September had a totaT Tabor
demand cm‘ 133 workdays or 18.6 workdays above the potentiaT famiTy
Tabor suppTy. Even when the potentiaT monthTy suppTy of strange
farmers was incTuded, the September deficit was 14.2 workdays. Off—
farm activities were estimated at 16 workdays for this month and totaT
nonfamiTy Tabor empToyed was 18.2 workdays. This means that about

78.0% of the hired Tabor was empToyed in the month of September.

Farm Equipment

 

The distribution of capitaT equipment by type and size group
is shown in TabTe 5.24. For aTT types of equipment and draft animaTs,
the average number owned per dabada increased with an increase in the
size of Tand honing. Opening vaTues for farm equipment were 047,
0134, and 0204 for smaTT, medium, and Targe farmers, respectiveTy.

The corresponding vaTues for draft animaTs were 086, D269, and D604
per_gabaga, respectiveTy.

AnimaT traction was used for an average totaT of 14 hours
in smaTT farmers'fiers, .45 hours in medium farmers fiers, and 126

hours in Targe farmers fiers.

 

14See Appendix B-2 for a monthTy breakdown of the observed

monthTy Tabor demand.

 

 

 

 

 

253

TABLE 5.24.--Average Number of Ox-drawn Equipment/AnimaTs Owned per
Househon (Dabada) by size of Land Honing

 

 

 

Equipment/AnimaT SmaTT (14)a Medium (64)a Large (12)a
Seeder (with pTates) 0.21 0.70 1.17
Moquboard pTow 0.14 0.45 0.50
Cart -- 0.19 0.67
Needing tines 0.21 0.38 0.42
BuTTs 0.07 0.13 0.33
Donkeys 0.29 0.59 0.75
Horses -- 0.13 0.33
Source: Survey data.

aFigures in parenthesis show the number of househons in each
size group.

 

 

 

 

254

Farm Income AnaTysis

 

VaTue of Output

The average budget per dabada for the different size groups
is shown in TabTe 5.25. A breakdown of the sources of farm income,
reTative income contributed, percent of Tand and Tabor used in each
crop for each size category is shown in TabTe 5.26. The totaT vaTue
of farm products or the gross farm income per dabada was 0590.59 for
smaTT farmers, 01627.19 for medium farmers, and 03964.30 for Targe
farmers. This is equivaTent to a gross farm income per person of
098.43, 0157.98, and 0521.62 or 0908.60, 0749.86, and 0921.93 per
hectare of Tand, respectiveTy.

The gross income per unit of farm Tabor devoted to crops was
02.60, 04.27, and 06.16 for smaTT, medium, and Targe farmers, respec-
tiveTy. Both gross farm income per person and gross farm income per
unit of Tabor increased with an increase in the size of Tand honing.

The percentage of income derived from groundnuts increased
with an increase in the size of Tand honing whiTe the percentage of
income derived from food crops decreased with an increase in the size
of Tand honing. Income from groundnuts was 23. % of the totaT gross
farm income for smaTT farmers, 36.6% for medium farmers, and 55.9%
for Targe farmers, whiTe inc0me derived from upTand cereaTs was 18.6%,
19.8%, and 12.7% and that from rice was 57.7%, 41.3%, and 31.4% of the
totaT gross farm income, respectiveTy. ATthough the reTative income
from food crops decreased with an increase in the size of Tand honing,

the absoTute amount per person increased with an increase in the

 

 

 

 

255

TABLE 5.25.—~Average Househon (Dabada) Farm Budget by Size of Land

 

 

 

Honing
SmaTT Medium Large
GeneraT Data

a. Average Tand honing 0.65 2.17 4.30
b. Average famiTy size ‘

MaTe 2.8 4.7 3.8

FemaTe 3.2 5.6 3.8

TotaT 6.0 10.3 7.6
c. Active famiTy member 5 0 9.1 6.3

(10-60 years) -- 0.3 0.2
d. Strange farmers 12 45 126
e. Hours of animaT/

ox-equipment input 14 64 12
f. Number of househons

(Dabada)

Income and Expenditure (DaTasis) (DaTasis) (DaTasis)
a. VaTue of farm output 590.59 1627.19 3964.30
b. Operating expenses

Labor 15.46 30.64 22.85
Seeds 29.03 62.88 118.92
FertiTizer 1.66 3.45 23.11
AnimaT/ox-equipment 1.60 1.99 1.36
Irrigation/pTowing 19.88 45.44 56.80
TotaT Operating Expenses 67.63 144.40 223.04
c. Gross Margin 522.96 1482.79 3741.26
d. Fixed Costs
Depreciation
AnimaTs 4.00 18.00 33.00
Ox-equipment 8.00 14.00 24.00
Other hand tooTs 2.63 2.80 4.49
Strange Farmer -- 36.00 24.00
TotaT Fixed Costs 14.63 70.86 85.49
e. TotaT Costs 82.26 215.26 308.53
f. Net Farm Income 508.33 141.93 3655.77
9. Off-farm Earnings 45.36 55.64 27.66
h. Net FamiTy Income 553.69 1467.57 3683.43
Source: Survey Data.

 

 

 

256

”.mymo >o>cam “mugzom

 

 

 

 

o.ooH o.ooH o.ooH om.¢mmm o.ooH o.ooH o.ooH mH.HNeH o.ooH o.ooH o.ooH mm.oam mseeoe
.. -- u- u- e.H a.o m.~ mm.nm. .. u- u- -- copuoo
m.mm ¢.e~ H.Hm ao.me~H m.mm a.Hm m.H¢ He.HHm o.He m.mm H.Hm mw.oem aon Heeoe
wnwnu n.~ mqmun mm.meH uHJmn wamn muMn mm.mHH muMHu. mumuu wumfln mm.om eapamwttH cemmmm Ha:
m.~ m.H m.o om.o~ m.e w.~ m.e wH.HHH m.oH 0.4 m.~ 4H.HH ewuemHttH comawm Hem
m.mm H.oH H.mH mo.-e N.mH H.HH w.mH em.oHN .. u- u- -- mace a>oemcmz
e.NH N.“ w.m mo.mmm H.N~ H.HH H.mH mH.mH~ a.m~ w.e~ ~.em ON.~o~ maTe mumwmw
o.~ m.H o.H cm.¢o m.~ m.~ m.o mH.eH m.e H.m o.H HH.He aon eat—a:
«.mH H.MN N.NH H~.eom m.mH m.Hm m.mH mm.H~m H.mH m.mm m.wH we.moH mHmetau ceaHaz HMHOH

.. -- u- .. H.0 o.o H.0 mm.o .. u- u- .. Hewtmpmmwov oeeHa
N.0 ~.H e.o mH.mH H.H N.m H.H Hm.mm o.m m.MH H.m Hw.mm uaHHHE memmmv apes
m.m o.mH N.m om.m¢w m.m H.HH o.o Hm.HoH -u u- u- .. paHHHz Hoczmv sHtam
e.H N.e m.~ oo.mm m.m m.H e.e mo.NH m.~ H.m m.H Nm.m asemtom
m.m m.m o.m “H.HeH a.e N.m 8.8 ow.HoH N.H m.oH e.HH mH.He mNHmz
m.m~ a.Hm m.mm oo.mH- m.m~ m.mm 8.0m em.mom m.o~ N.NN H.m~ oo.oeH page=201o

 

toaaH H eema H H ADV Heaoe< LODMH H eeeH H H HOV “cease toemH & ecea N & Hov pesos<

mEoocH msoucH wEoucH
Etna mo mugzom Eta; mo moxaom ELM; we wuxzow

 

memH Ezwumz HHmEm

HHmmmmmmv eHOIamsox
Lena mcHuHo: c:MH we mNHm Ha qoeu comm Low uwm: Loan use ucwH wmmucwugwa wee msoocH Etna we muugzomuu.mm.m mHm<e

257

size of Tand honing from 075.10 for smaTT farmers to 096.47 for
medium farmers to 0230.17 for Targe farmers. In terms of food seTf—
sufficiency this indicates that Targe farmers are in a better position
to meet their food requirements from the farm than do medium and smaTT
farmers.

Bafaro rice was the highest income earner for smaTT farmers,
whiTe groundnut was the highest income earner for medium and Targe
farmers.

The percentages of both Tand and Tabor devoted to groundnut
increased with an increase in size, whereas the percentage of Tand and
Tabor devoted to both upTand cereaTs and rice decreased with an
increase in the size of Tand honing. These resuTts suggest that
smaTT farmers give a higher priority to the satisfaction of their
subsistence needs in terms of food than to the cuTtivation of commer-
ciaT crops. As farmers accumuTate capitaT and are abTe to increase
their size of Tand honing, the emphasis tends to shift to commerciaT

agricuTture whiTe maintaining a higher subsistence TeveT of Tiving.

Operating Costs and Gross Income

 

TotaT variabTe costs per dabada for smaTT, medium, and Targe
farmers was 067.63, 0144.40, and 0233.04, respectiveTy. Seeds were
the singTe highest cost item in aTT size categories, accounting for
42.9% in smaTT farmers, 43.5% in medium farmers, and 53.5% in Targe
farmers. Irrigation and pTowing were the next highest cost item con-
tributing about 29.4%, 31.5%, and 25.5% to the operating costs of smaTT,

medium, and Targe farmers, respectiveTy. The operating ratio which

258

reTates operating costs to the gross income was 0.11, 0.09, and 0.06
for smaTT, medium, and Targe farmers, respectiveTy.

The gross margins per dabada was estimated at 0522.96,
01,482.79, and 03,741.26 or 087.16, 0143.96, and 0492.27 per person for
smaTT, medium, and Targe farmers, respectiveTy. This is equivaTent
to a gross margin per hectare of 0804.55, 0683.31, and 0870.06,
respectiveTy. Gross margin per unit of farm Tabor input was 02.30,

03.89, and 05.81 for smaTT, medium, and Targe farmers, respectiveTy.

Fixed Costs

Fixed costs incTude depreciation for equipment, draft animaTs,
other hand tooTs, and an estimated cost for strange farmers. These
costs amounted to 014.63 for smaTT farmers, 070.86 for medium farmers,
and 085.49 for Targe farmers. The corresponding fixed ratios were

0.02, 0.04, and 0.02, respectiveTy.

TotaT Costs

The sum of the operating costs and fixed costs were 082.26,
0215.26, and 0308.53 per dabada for the smaTT, medium, and Targe
farmers, respectiveTy. The gross ratios, which reTate the totaT
costs to the gross incomes and are the sums of the operating ratios
and fixed ratios, were equaT to 0.14, 0 13, and 0.08 for the smaTT,
medium, and Targe farmers, respectiveTy. This means that smaTT farm-
ers spent more than medium and Targe farmers for each daTasis of income
generated, whiTe Targe farmers spent the Teast for each daTasis of

gross income generated.

 

259

Net Farm Income

Net farm income per dabada was highest for Targe farmers with
an average of 03,655.77 and Towest for smaTT farmers with an average
of 0508.33. Medium farmers had a net farm income of 01,411.93. Net
farm incomes were equaT to net farm earnings because no interest was
paid on capitaT.

Net farm earnings per person was 084.72, 0137.08, and 0481.02
for the smaTT, medium, and Targe farmers, respectiveTy, or 0782.05,
0650.66, and 0856.61 per hectare of Tand, respectiveTy. Net farm
earnings per unit of famiTy Tabor input on the farm was 02.31, 04.04,
and 06.22 for the smaTT, medium, and Targe farmers, respectiveTy.
Large farmers had the highest net farm earnings per unit of Tand and

Tabor input.

Return to FamiTy Labor
and Management

Assuming a 15% interest charge on capitaT and an opportunity

 

cost on irrigated Tand of 0400.00 per hectare, the net return to
famiTy Tabor and management was 0467.99, 01,315.64, and 03,529.49
per dabada for smaTT, medium, and Targe farmers, respectiveTy. This
is equaT to 02.13, 03.96, and 06.01 per workday of famiTy Tabor input

on the farm, respectiveTy.

Net FamiTy Earnings

Net famiTy earnings is the sum of net farm earnings pTus off—
farm earnings. Off-farm earnings per dabada amounted to 045.36,

055.64, and 027.66 for the smaTT, medium, and Targe farmers,

 

260

respectiveTy. This is equaT to 7.1%, 3.3%, and 0.7% of the totaT
gross income,respectiveTy. Thus, there is a Tesser reTiance on off-
farm income as the size of Tand honing increases. TotaT net famiTy
earnings were equaT to 0553.69, 01,467.57, and 03,683.43 per dabada
for smaTT, medium, and Targe farmers, respectiveTy. This means that
the totaT estimated disposabTe income avaiTabTe for aTT purpose use
per person was 092.28 for smaTT farmers, 0142.48 for medium farmers,
and 0484.66 for Targe farmers. Net famiTy earnings per person for
Targe farmers was about five times that for smaTT farmers and about
three times that for medium farmers. These resuTts agree with find-
ings in Northern Nigeria by Norman (1973) who reports that Targe
farmers earn more than twice as much as smaTT farmers and that smaTT
farmers' reTiance on off-farm income is much higher.

Since incomes are Tow, smaTT farmers are unabTe to save and
accumuTate capitaT. This Timits their abiTity to overcome adverse
circumstances and may resuTt in a conservative attitude to change
(Norman, 1973).

If aTT the net famiTy earnings per person were to be spent
on purchasing rice, then net famiTy earnings in miTTed rice equivaTent
woqu be about 117 kiTograms for smaTT farmers, 180 kiTograms for
medium farmers, and 613 kiTograms for Targe farmers. Assuming that
aTT caTorie intake is satisfied from rice, then net famiTy earnings
per person for smaTT and medium farmers cannot purchase the minimum
182 5 kiTograms of cereaTs required. In contrast, Targe farmers woqu
have to spend onTy about 30% of their income on rice to achieve this

minimum.

 

261

To summarize, an anaTysis of the sampTe by size of Tand
honing reveaTed that farm femaTe Tabor becomes increasingTy impor-
tant as the size of Tand honing increases. SmaTT farmers devoted
most of their Tand and Tabor on food crops cuTtivation whiTe Targer
farmers devoted a Tesser proportion of their Tand and Tabor on food
crops. Despite this, the resuTts show that Targe farmers are in a
better position to meet their food requirements from the farm than do
smaTT and medium farmers.

The farm income anaTysis showed a high disparity of income
between smaTT, medium, and Targe farmers. Large farmers net famiTy
earnings per person were more than three times that of medium farmers
and more than five times that of smaTT farmers. The proportion of
totaT gross incmmederived from off-farm empToyment was higher in smaTT

farmers than in medium and Targe farmers.

W

The main objective of this chapter was to describe and
discuss the organization of farm production and resource use among
Gambian rice farmers. 0n the average the groundnut crop was the
main income earner for the dabada accounting for about 44% of the
totaT average gross farm income and utiTizing about 39% of the totaT
Tand area. Rice contributed Tess to totaT income than did groundnuts
but used more than han of the totaT Tabor and about one-third of the
totaT Tand area cuTtivated by the dabada. Labor input on the cr0p
enterprises between aduTt maTes and femaTes was about equaT but men

contributed more of the Tabor in generaT and off—farm activities than

did femaTes.

 

 

 

 

262

For the whoTe sampTe population average net famiTy earnings
per capita was 0208.37 ($94.71). Farmers woqu have to spend about
69% of their income on rice hnorder to meet the minimum daiTy caTorie
intake of 1750 if aTT caTorie requirements were to be satisfied from
rice. The contribution of upland cereaTs and rice to gross income
per gabaga_was onTy 54.6% or 0124.37 per person. This shows that on
the average, farmers cannot meet their minimum caTorie requirements
from cereaTs produced on the farm aTone. They may have to depend
on outside sources to suppTement what is produced on the farm.

A division of the sampTe popuTation into regions reveaTed a
tendency for each region to speciaTize on one cereaT crop. SpeciaTi-
zation is moving toward earTy (sung) miTTet in the mangrove rice
region, maize in the_bafarg rices region, and sorghum in the irrigated
rice region. The average aduTt woman in the bafaro region worked
more than the average man on the crop activities. In the irrigated
rice region, the average man Tabor input on the farm was higher than
that of the average women and in the mangrove region they were about
equaT.

TotaT net farm earnings per workday of famiTy Tabor were
highest in the bafaro rice region and Towest in the irrigated rice
region. Net famiTy earnings per person was 0214.80, 0230.38, and
0185.63 for the mangrove, bafarg, and irrigated rice regions, respec-
tiveTy. To be abTe to consume a minimum of 182.5 kiTograms of rice,

farmers woqu have to spend about 69.1%, 62.5%, and 77.7% of their

net famiTy earnings on rice in the mangrove, Qéfaro, and irrigated

 

 

 

 

263

rice regions, respectiveTy. The gross income from upTand cereaTs and
rice was 0106.49 in the mangrove rice region, 0161.02 in the bafaro
rice region, and 0124.30 in the irrigated rice region. The resuTts
show that onTy the bafaro rice region is TikeTy to meet its cereaTs
requirement from the cereaTs produced on the farm.

An anaTysis of the sampTe popuTation by size of Tand honing
showed that famaTe Tabor became increasingTy important as the size of
Tand honing increased. SmaTT farmers devoted most of their Tand and
Tabor on food crops whiTe Targe farmers devoted a greater percentage
of their Tand and Tabor on cash crops. Large farmers are in a better
position to meet their food needs from the farm than smaTT and medium
farmers. The net famiTy earnings per capita in Targe farmers was

about three times as much as that of medium farmers and five times

as much as that of smaTT farmers.

 

 

CHAPTER VI

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, POLICY IMPOICATIONS
AND DIRECTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH

Summary_and ConcTusions

The Gambia is one of the smaTTest countries in the African
continent. In 1980 it had an estimated popuTation of 603,000. The
main physicaT feature is the river, which is one of the finest water
ways in Africa. It serves as an important means of transporting
commodities to and from the capitaT city, BanjuT. It is aTso an
important source of irrigation water.

The Gambia's economic structure has not changed very much in
recent years. There are stiTT no known commerciaTTy expToitabTe min-
eraTs and the onTy sectors of the economy with any potentiaT for
deveTopment are agricuTture and the tourist sector. In fact, agri—
cuTture assumes priority not onTy because a Targe percentage of the
popuTation derives its Tiving from it but aTso because the deveTopment
of agricuTture appears to be the safest and most stabTe avenue for
increasing ruraT income and empToyment and improving the shortage of
foreign exchange. AgricuTture accounts for about 28% of the Gross
Domestic Product.

Groundnut is by far the most important singTe cash crop in the

country. In addition to being the major source of ruraT income, it

264

L

265

accounts for over 75% of the totaT export earnings, averaging about
90% in the past seven years. This heavy dependence on one cash crop
means that the country's economic prospects are highTy unpredictabTe
and tend to fTuctuate in sympathy with fTuctuations in groundnut
incomes.

Subsistence crops in The Gambia incTude rice, sorghum, miTTet,
maize, and to a Timited extent, cassava. TraditionaTTy, sorghum and
miTTet formed the main stapTe crops, but in recent years, rice has
become the most important. In the 1960's domestic rice production
increased by 3.3% per annum. But in the 1970‘s domestic production
of rice decTined by nearTy 2.8% annuaTTy. This decTine has been
experienced despite a concerted effort to increase rice production
during those years. Since independence, the government has adopted
seTf-sufficiency of food stapTes as a nationaT poTicy goaT, but food
imports have continued to increase to the extent that today the
country imports more than han of its domestic rice consumption.

Despite their importance in the economy, the agricuTturaT
sector and the food grain subsector in particuTar have untiT recentTy
received very TittTe attention from economists. There is, therefore,
a dearth of information to guide poTicy makers and pTanners in their
quest for food seTf—sufficiency. This study was aimed at fiTTing
part of that gap.

The overaTT objective of the study was to provide a detaiTed
description of rice production systems in The Gambia and to determine
the financiaT and economic costs and benefits of the different rice

production systems. The specific objectives were to:

L

 

266

1. describe the agrocTimatic conditions of rice
production and the sociaT structure of rice
farmers in The Gambia
2. identify and describe the major rice production
systems in The Gambia
3. determine and compare the financiaT and economic
costs and benefits of the major rice production
systems on a hectare basis
4. estimate the totaT amount of resources used in rice
farming and the farm incomes of rice farmers on a
househon (dabada) basis and type of predominant
rice cuTtivation system and by size of Tand area
cuTtivated
The information used in this study formed part of the data
coTTected by the author on the socioeconomics of rice farmers in The
Gambia for the West Africa Rice DeveTopment Association (WAROA). A
two-stage stratified random sampTing method was used to obtain a sampTe
of 100 househons from ten viTTages in the centraT and eastern por-
tions of the country. The finaT sampTe used in the anaTysis contained
ninety househons. The gabada, an autonomous work group within the
Targer kordo structure was used as a sampTing unit. Data coTTection
was carried out over a one-year period from June 1981 to June 1982.
A financaiT and economic anaTysis technique was the major
method of anaTysis empToyed in this study. Enterprise and farm budgets

were prepared and discussed. Both the data coTTection and data anaTysis

 

 

 

 

 

 

267

were faciTitated by the use of the FAO's Farm Management Data CoTTec-
tion and AnaTysis System (FMDCAS).

In the enterprise budgets, input/output coefficients were
caTcuTated on a weighted average basis per hectare for each of the
enterprises cuTtivated by the sampTe popuTation. The resuTts showed
that Tabor was the most important factor of production in Gambia
farms. Among the rice enterprises, bafaro rice had the highest
demand on Tabor with about 361 workdays per hectare and upTand rice
had the Towest demand on Tabor with about 254 workdays per hectare.
Mangrove rice cuTtivation utiTized nearTy 326 workdays per hectare.
Dry and wet season irrigated rice used aTmost 331 and 324 workdays per
hectare, respectiveTy.

Irrigated rice cuTtivation is the cornerstone of future rice
production expansion in The Gambia. It is envisaged that when the
proposed bridge—barrage at YeTitenda is compTeted by the year 2000,
about 24,000 hectares of irrigated Tand wiTT be deveToped for doubTe
rice cropping. ATthough technicaT anaTysis has estabTished the feasi-
biTity of the proposed bridge—barrage, sociaT, economic, and environ-
mentaT impact anaTysis have yet to Tend credence to that project. The
Gambia has yet to Tearn from its mistakes in the smaTT scaTe irriga-
tion projects that have so far faiTed.

Given that The Gambia government is committed and determined
to construct the bridge—barrage, then a deveTopment of 24,000 hectares
of irrigated Tand for doubTe crop rice production wiTT generate cTose

to 15.72 miTTion workdays of empToyment in the year 2000. Assuming

 

268

a 22 days work month, this means that about 59,545 persons per annum
wiTT be fuTTy empToyed in rice cuTtivation. It is doubtfuT whether
such a demand on Tabor wiTT be satisfied from househons within the
irrigated rice cuTtivation area aTone. It is most TikeTy that the
Tabor wiTT be satisfied by migrant workers from within The Gambia
and neighboring countries. Such magnitudes of migrants with their
attendant heaTth and sociaT probTems shoqu be a matter of concern.

Assuming that the potentiaT Tabor demand is satisfied by
Gambians onTy, then nearTy 12,000 dabadaTu, each cuTtivating about
two hectares, wiTT be fuTTy empToyed on irrigated rice cuTtivation.
This is about 16% of the estimated popuTation in 1980.

An expansion of any of the other rice systems by simiTar
magnitudes wiTT generate onTy about han the amount of empToyment
generated in irrigated rice because onTy one crop can be produced in
a year.

The highest yier per hectare was recorded among the irri-
gated rice systems and the Towest yier was recorded on the upTand
rice system. Yiers were 1,326, 1,828, 1,880, 2,767, and 2,429
kiTograms for the upTand rice, bafaro rice, mangrove rice, dry and
wet season irrigated rice, respectiveTy. The average area per dabada
among those cuTtivating rice was 0.20, 0.50, 0.68, 0.17, and 0.30
hectares of upTand rice, bafaro rice, mangrove rice, dry and wet
season irrigated rice, respectiveTy.

SubstantiaT differences were not recorded for Tabor use per
hectare among the upTand crops. The highest Tabor input per hectare

was on Tate (sanyo) miTTetwith an average of 121 workdays. Sorghum

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

269

had the Towest Tabor input with an average of 91 workdays. Labor
input on groundnut, maize, and earTy (sgng) miTTet was about 119,
116, and 118 workdays per hectare, respectiveTy. Groundnut had an
average yier of 1,717 kiTograms per hectare. The highest yier
among the upTand cereaTs was recorded in maize with an average of
1,013 kiTograms per hectare. Sorghum, earTy (sung) miTTet and Tate
(sagyo) miTTet had yiers per hectare of 884, 827, and 961 kiTograms,
respectiveTy.

A discussion of the gender division of Tabor showed that
except for irrigated rice cuTtivation, there is a distinct, though
not rigid, division of Tabor aTong crop enterprise Tines. Women
dominated the cuTtivation of upTand rice, bafaro rice, and mangrove
rice where they contributed more than 90%, 88%, and 94% of the totaT
Tabor, respectiveTy. In irrigated rice cuTtivation, women contributed
approximateTy 50% and 60% of the totaT Tabor in the dry and wet season
irrigated rice, respectiveTy. UpTand cr0ps are the domain of men.
TotaT Tabor contribution on groundnuts, maize, sorghum, earTy (sgng)
and Tate (sagyg) miTTet by men was cTose to 95%, 89%, 91%, and 93%
of the totaT Tabor per hectare, respectiveTy. In aTT the crop enter-
prices fmnihyTabor contributed no Tess than 90% of the totaT Tabor
per hectare. The impTication here is that deveTopment programs that
are geared toward individuaT crops are TikeTy to affect the baTance
between maTe and femaTe Tabor input and aTso the reTative economic
position of each sex. If the weTfare of women, for exampTe, is of

primary concern, then programs shoqu be directed toward the deveTOp-

ment of upTand rice, bafaro rice, and mangrove rice. ATthough such

 

 

 

270

an approach wiTT improve the economic positions of women, unTess
Tabor productivity is improved, it wiTT aTso Tead to women working
more hours. ATso to be carefuTTy watched is the impact that women's
economic independence wiTT have on the traditionaT famiTy structure.

A financiaT anaTysis showed that aTT systems of rice pro-
duction had positive net enterprise incomes of about 0656, 0806, 0914,
0926, and 0848 per hectare of upTand rice, bafaro rice, mangrove rice,
dry and wet season irrigated rice, respectiveTy. This represented
the reward to famiTy Tabor, Tand, Operating capitaT, and management.
However, the returns per workday to famiTy Tabor and management were
higher than the enterprise wage rate onTy in upTand rice and mangrove
rice with returns of 02.55 and 02.81 per workday of famiTy Tabor,
respectiveTy. Bafaro rice, dry and wet season irrigated rice, respec-
tiveTy, showed Tower returns than the enterprise wage rates of 02.36,
01.58, and 01.26 per workday of famiTy Tabor. To make the returns
to famiTy Tabor and management greater than the enterprise wage rate
for the bafaro, dry and wet season irrigated rice, it was estimated
that yiers woqu have to be increased by at Teast 337, 1,320, and
1,373 kiTograms per hectare, respectiveTy. ATternativeTy, prices
woqu have to be increased by at Teast 57% above current TeveTs to make
aTT returns per workday to famiTy Tabor and management greater than
the enterprise wage rates in aTT the rice enterprises.

The economic anaTysis with output vaTued at the import parity
price and famiTy Tabor vaTued at the enterprise wage rate showed nega-

tive net economic returns per ton of paddy of about 0161, 0264, 0158,

0479, and 0443 for the upTand rice, bafaro rice, mangrove rice, dry

 

 

 

271

and wet season irrigated rice, respectiveTy. If the assumptions made
in the anaTysis are correct, then the resuTts showed that The Gambia
had a comparative disadvantage in the cuTtivation of rice when consid-
ered from the nationaT point of view. The output per hectare required
to make the net economic returns at Teast equaT to zero were estimated
at 1,953, 3,247, 2,655, 6,669, and 5,594 kiTograms for the upTand
rice, bafaro rice, mangrove rice, dry and wet season irrigated rice,
respectiveTy. These yier TeveTs are nearTy 47%, 78%, 47%, 141%, and
130% above the observed yiers, respectiveTy.

Since the economic anaTyses were so sensitive to the vaTuation
of famiTy Tabor, a sensitivity anaTysis was carried out by vaTuing
Tabor at zero opportunity cost and then at han the enterprise wage

rate. At zero opportunity cost for famiTy Tabor, the net economic

 

 

benefits per ton of paddy were approximateTy 0314, 0267, 0312, 0-68,
and 08 for the upTand rice, bafarg_rice, mangrove rice, dry and wet
season irrigated rice, respectiveTy. When famiTy Tabor was vaTued at
han the enterprise wage rate, the corresponding net economic bene-
fits per ton of paddy were 077, 01, 077, 0-273 and 0-218, respectiveTy.
This resuTt showed that onTy upTand rice and managrove rice and to a
Timited extent bafaro rice offered any hope for optimism from the
nationaT point of view.

A financiaT and economic anaTysis of the upTand crops showed
that both net enterprise incomes and net economic benefits were posi-
tive for aTT the crops even though famiTy Tabor was vaTued at the

enterprise wage rates. Net enterprise incomes per hectare were about

0751, D423, 0357, 0365, and 0398 for groundnut, maize, sorghum,

 

 

 

272

earTy (sung) and Tate (sanyg) miTTet, respectiveTy. The net economic
returns per ton were 0576 for groundnut, 0156 for maize, 0113 for
sorghum, 044 for earTy (sgngi miTTet, and 07 for Tate (sanyg) miTTet.

On the whoTe net enterprise incomes per hectare ranged from
nearTy 0645 to 0926 in the rice crops and from 0357 to 0751 in the
upTand crops. Net economic returns per ton of output, with famiTy Tabor
vaTued at the enterprise wage rate ranged from cTose to minus 0479
to minus 0158 for the rice crops and from 07 to 0576 for the upTand
crops.

A simpTe anaTysis designed to estimate the costs and benefits

 

of achieving a rice consumption rate of 90kg/cap./annum through the
expansion of irrigated rice showed that such a poTicy coqu Tead to
substantiaT economic Tosses and a reduction of the gross nationaT
product by at Teast 09 miTTion per annum.

A farm income anaTysis was carried out for a better under-
standing of the organization of the farm and to determine the sources
of income on a househon (dabada) basis. For the whoTe sampTe popu-
Tation the average Tand area cuTtivated was 2.24 hectares. Of this
area about 39% was devoted to groundnut production, Tess than 1% to
cotton, and the rest was equaTTy shared between upTand cereaTs and
rice production. The average area per aduTt was 0.43 hectares.

The average famiTy size per dabada was 7.8 peopTe with 3.8
maTes and 4.0 femaTes. AduTts made up nearTy 67% of the famiTy size.
A breakdown of the Tabor input in the farm showed that aTmost 91% of

the Tabor was contributed by the famiTy. Strange farmers who averaged

0.2 per househon (dabada) contributed nearTy 4%, the rest was

 

 

 

273

contributed by other nonfamiTy Tabor. The highest Tabor input per
crop was devoted to groundnut which utiTized about 26% of the totaT
Tabor input on crops. UpTand cereaTs used about 18% and rice cuT—
tivation used about 55% of the totaT Tabor input on crops.

TotaT Tabor input on farm and off—farm activities averaged
approximateTy 533 workdays per dabada. Farm activities accounted for
73% of the totaT Tabor input and off—farm activities accounted for 27%.

The average aduTt Tabor input on crop production was a TittTe
over 60 workdays. FemaTe aduTts averaged 62 workdays and maTe aduTts
averaged 59 workdays. Average totaT Tabor input per aduTt was 91
workdays, with femaTes averaging 81 workdays and maTes averaging 102
workdays. This does not incTude househon and Tivestock activities.
There was an inverse reTationship between farm Tabor input and Tabor
input on off-farm activities and estimated Teisure time. Farmers
reduced Tabor input on nonremunerative off-farm activities and Teisure
time as Tabor demand for farm work increased. The extent to which
Tabor input on off—farm nonremunerative activities and Teisure time
coqu be tapped for productive farm work purposes wiTT depend on the
marginaT returns in agricuTture and the marginaT disutiTities from

giving up Teisure time and off-farm activities. It is aTso constrained
by the seasonaTity of Tabor.

A comparison of the sources of income showed that groundnut
was the highest source of income, contributing aTmost 43% of the totaT
gross income. UpTand cereaTs and rice contributed 17% and 36%, respec-

tiveTy. Income from off—farm activities was very smaTT amounting to

 

274

Tess than 3% of the totaT gross income. The net farm income averaged
01,575 per dabada or 04.39 per unit of famiTy Tabor input or 0703 per
hectare. Net famiTy earnings, which are an estimate of the disposabTe
income, were estimated at 01,625 per dabada or 0208 ($94) per person.
If aTT caTorie requirements were to be satisfied from rice aTone,

this meant that farmers woqu have to spend nearTy 69% of their income
to meet a minimum daiTy caTorie intake of 1,750 caTories per capita.
0n the average this minimum coqu not be satisfied from the farm

grain output.

To study the effect of regionaT specificity on farm organiza-
tion and income, the sampTe was divided into three subsampTes corre—
sponding to the mangrove rice region, bafaro_rice region, and irrigated
rice region. ViTTages were assigned to this region on the basis of the
predominant rice cuTtivation system in each viTTage. The average area
cuTtivated per dabaga_was 2.90, 1.96, and 1.91 in the mangrove, bafaro
and irrigated rice regions, respectiveTy. The average area cuTtivated
per aduTt was 0.45 for the mangrove rice region, 0.44 for the bafarg
region, and 0.41 for the irrigated rice region. Based on the propor-
tion of area devoted to each upTand cereaT, there was a tendency for
each region to speciaTize on one upTand crop. SpeciaTization in earTy
(ggng) miTTet in the mangrove rice growing area is aTmost compTete as
it accounted for about 96% of the area devoted to upTand cereaTs. In
the bafarg rice region, the movement is in the direction of speciaTiz-

ing in maize cuTtivation which accounted for 44% of the area under

upTand cereaTs. In the irrigated rice region, sorghum accounted for 53%

 

275

of the area under upTand cereaTs. If this movement continues, the
impTication is that deveTopment programs designed to improve upTand
cereaTs production must be region specific. Concentration on one
upTand cereaT onTy may Tead to one region benefiting to the totaT
echusion of other regions.

The average Tabor input per dabada on crop production was
approximateTy 491, 292, and 352 workdays in the mangrove, bafaro,
and irrigated rice regions, respectiveTy. The crop Tabor input per
aduTt was higher in the mangrove rice region with about 67 workdays
than the other regions which averaged about 58 workdays each. FemaTe
Tabor input on the crop enterprises was about equaT, greater, and
Tesser than that of maTes in the mangrove, bafarp, and irrigated rice
regions, respectiveTy. FemaTe Tabor input per aduTt was aTmost equaT
in the mangrove and bafaro rice regions and greater than that of the
irrigated rice region by about 44%. Labor input per aduTt famiTy
maTe was aTmost equaT in the mangrove and irrigated rice regions and
greater than that of the bafarg rice region by about 57%.

FamiTy Tabor in each region contributed more than 90% of the
totaT Tabor input. The average totaT Tabor input per dabada was
about 602 workdays, 459, and 565 workdays for the mangrove, bafaro,
and irrigated rice regions, respectiveTy. Farm activities accounted
for nearTy 8 %, 65%, and 67% of the totaT Tabor input for the mangrove
rice region, bafaro rice region, and irrigated rice region, respec-
tiveTy. The totaT Tabor input per aduTt famiTy maTe was nearTy 98, 86,
and 138 workdays and that of femaTes was about 72, 98, and 68 workdays

for the mangrove, bafaro, and irrigated rice regions, respectiveTy.

 

 

276

Given the proper incentives, a substantiaT proportion of the Tabor
input in off-farm activities in the bafarg and irrigated rice regions
coqu be diverted to productive agricuTturaT activities.

The bafaro rice region showed a greater seasonaTity in farm
Tabor input than the other regions, probabTy because of the Tower
rainfaTT.

The budget anaTysis showed an average net farm income per
ggggyyg of approximateTy 02,106 for the mangrove rice region, 01,344
for the bafaro rice region, and 01,333 for the irrigated rice region.
This was equaT to net farm earnings per person of 0213, 0213, and
0185 or 0726, D686, and 0698 per hectare, respectiveTy. Net farm
earnings per unit of famiTy Tabor were highest in the bafarg rice
region and Towest in the irrigated rice region. Off-farm earnings
in each case were Tess than 7% of the totaT gross income. Net famiTy
earnings per person were approximateTy 0215 in the mangrove rice
region, 0230 in the bafarg_rice region, and 0186 in the irrigated rice
region. Househons (dabadaTu) woqu have to spend about 69%, 63%, and
78% of their incomes if the minimum daiTy caTorie requirements were
to be met from rice consumption aTone.

The sampTe was aTso divided into three size categories to
study the effect of size of Tand area cultivated on farm organizations
and farm incomes. The average area cuTtivated per gabaga_was 0-65
hectares for the smaTT farmers, 2.17 hectares for the medium farmers,
and 4.30 hectares for the Targe farmers. SmaTT farmers devoted 28%

of their Tand to groundnut production, 34% to upTand cereaTs, and

38% to rice production. Medium farmers aTTocated 36% to groundnut

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

277

production 31% to upTand cereaTs, and 32% to rice. The corresponding
percentages for Targe farmers was 52%, 24%, and 24%, respectiveTy.

The totaT area cuTtivated per aduTt famiTy member was 0.17, 0.32, and
0.80 hectares for the smaTT, medium, and Targe farmers, respectiveTy.

TotaT Tabor input per dabada on the crop enterprises was
Towest for the smaTT farmers and highest for the Targe farmers. There
was a decTine in Tabor input per hectare as the sampTe size increased.
Large farmers used a greater percentage of nonfamiTy Tabor than did
the medium and smaTT farmers.

Labor input per aduTt maTe on the crop enterprises was about
58, 48, and 84 workdays and that of femaTes was 38, 43, and 113 work-
days in smaTT, medium, and Targe farmers. FemaTe Tabor input increased
with an increase in size of Tand honing. The Tabor distribution on
groundnut, upTand cereaTs, and rice was simiTar in aTT size categories.
However, smaTT farmers devoted a greater percentage, 80%, of their
Tabor to food crop production than did medium farmers with 73% and
Targe farmers with 72%.

The totaT Tabor input per 992292.0T Targe farmers was aTmost
two times higher than that of smaTT farmers and nearTy one and a han
times higher than that of medium farmers. The percentage of totaT
Tabor devoted tofarming increased with an increase in the size of
Tand honing. SmaTT farmers devoted a greater proportion of their
off-farm activities on remunerative work than did medium and Targe
farmers. TotaT Tabor input per aduTt was about 117, 83, and 136

workdays for the smaTT, medium, and Targe farmers. There appeared

 

 

 

 

 

 

278

to be no reTationship between the size of Tand honing and the season-
aTity of farm Tabor. However, monthTy variation in totaT Tabor input
increased with an increase in the size of Tand honing. An estimation
of the potentiaT Tabor suppTy compared to the totaT Tabor demand
showed that in the month of September Targe farmers must empToy non—
famiTy Tabor to meet totaT Tabor demand.

Both the percentage of Tand and Tabor devoted to groundnut
increased with an increase in the size of Tand honing and the per-

centage of Tand and Tabor devoted to food crops decreased with an

 

increase in the size of Tand honing. This suggests that smaTT farm-
ers give a higher priority to food production than to cash crop pro-

duction. But as farmers accumuTate capitaT and as the size of Tand

 

cuTtivated increases, the emphasis tends to shift to commerciaT
agricuTture whiTe maintaining a higher subsistence TeveT of Tiving.

In the farm budget anaTysis the percentage of totaT gross
income obtained from off-farm activities decreased with an increase
in the size of Tand honing. Net farm income per gabaga_was highest
for Targe farmers with an average of 03,656 and Towest for smaTT
farmers with an average of 0508. Medium farmers had a dabada net farm
income of about 01,412. This was equaT to net farm earnings per unit
of famiTy Tabor of 02.31 for smaTT farmers, 04.04 for medium farmers,
and 06.22 for Targe farmers.

Net famiTy earnings for Targe farmers was more than five
times that of smaTT farmers and three times that of medium farmers.

Net famiTy earnings per person were equaT to about 092, 0142, and

0485 for the smaTT, medium, and Targe farmers. If farmers were to

 

 

279

obtain their minimum caTorie intake from rice aTone, smaTT and medium
farmers may not meet their minimum requirements, whiTe Targe farmers

woqu spend onTy about 30% of their income to achieve this minimum.

PoTicy ImpTications and Recommendations

 

The major poTicy issues which need to be addressed by the
government of The Gambia are presented in this section. Recommendations

based mostTy on the resuTts obtained in this study are aTso made.

Prices and Pricing PoTicy

 

The resuTts of the study have shown a positive net enterprise
income for aTT the rice enterprises considered. The net enterprise
incomes of aTT the rice enterprises were generaTTy higher than those
of groundnuts and upTand cereaTs. However, because of the high Tabor
input in rice production, the returns to famiTy Tabor and management
in rice production were generaTTy Tower than those of groundnut and
cereaTs. Prices for paddy woqu have to be increased by about 57%
above current TeveTs in order to make aTT returns per workday of
famiTy Tabor and management equaT to the enterprise wage rates.
SeveraT recent studies on grain production and marketing in The Gambia
have argued that the Tack of a positive food grain pricing poTicy is
the major obstacTe to achieving food seTf-sufficiency. They, there-
fore, caTT for increases in the producer prices of the food grains,
especiaTTy rice. This study Tends support to such recommendations.
However, the TeveT to which food grain prices shoqu be increased

shoqu be weighed against the economic benefits and poTiticaT risks

invoTved. For whiTe increases in the price of rice might Tead to

 

 

 

 

280

increased paddy production, the poTiticaT probTems associated with
discontent by the poTiticaTTy powerfuT urban consumers might mitigate
any production responses. ATso, consideration has to be given to the
effect of higher food grain prices on the reaT incomes and nutri-
tionaT status of the urban poor.

In the Tong run and in terms of overaTT food seTf—sufficiency,
a poTicy that wiTT increase the producer price and a marketing strategy
that can remove the surpTus grain from the farmers shoqu be adopted
for aTT the food grains, incTuding upTand cereaTs. This may prevent
the reaTTocation of resources from upTand cereaTs to groundnut that

has been accentuated by the introduction of animaT traction.

Output DisposaT

 

 

ReTated to agricuTturaT price poTicy is the question of out~
put disposaT. There is currentTy a Tack of an organized output coT-
Tection and disposaT system for rice and other food grains. ATthough
the GPMB is charged with the responsibiTity of marketing TocaTTy
produced rice, the profit margin is beTieved to be so Tow, if not
negative, that there is no incentive for GPMB to activeTy participate
in the coTTection of domesticaTTy produced rice. Even if the consumer
price of rice is increased, at the existing woer prices, the GPMB wiTT
stiTT find it more profitabTe to deaT in imported rice. The coTTection
and disposaT of rice at the viTTage TeveT is mostTy handTed by viTTage
traders. Since women are normaTTy not aTTowed to seTT Targe quanti—

ties of rice by their husbands, they are forced to seTT to viTTage

traders in secret at prices that are about 15 to 25% beTow the open

 

281

market price. To avoid these Tow prices, it is recommended that a
women's cooperative simiTar to that of men's be organized for the
specific purpose of marketing any surpTus rice output. This may be
better organized at the viTTage TeveT and can aTso be handTed by The
Gambia Cooperative Union.

With a positive price poTicy for aTT the upTand cereaTs, the
coTTection of surpTuses can be integrated with thegroundnut marketing
season. Farmers can seTT their grain at the same time they seTT their

groundnut.

Women's RoTe in Rice Production

 

The study showed that women were undoubtedTy the most impor-
tant sources of Tabor for rice cuTtivation. Even though irrigated
rice was introduced to men, women provided more than 50% of the totaT
Tabor input. Both in the interest of achieving rice seTf-sufficiency
and in improving the economic position of women, rice production,
at Teast in the short run, shoqu be considered the domain of women
and as such women shoqu be caTTed upon to fuTTy participate in the
appraisaT, preparation, and impTementation of any deveTopment program
geared toward rice cuTtivation. Because of the traditionaT famiTy
structure, this does not mean that men's roTe shoqu be considered
secondary; rather, it means that women shoqu now become an integraT

part of these deveTopment programs.

IndividuaT Rice Enterprises

 

The resuTts of the economic anaTysis showed that mangrove

rice, upTand rice, and bafaro rice are more economicaTTy profitabTe

 

282

than irrigated rice. However, in the past these systems of rice cuT-
tivation have received Tesser attention than that given to irrigated
rice. It is recommended that poTicy makers regard mangrove rice,
upTand rice, and pafgrg rice as other potentiaT aTternative systems for
achieving rice seTf-sufficiency. Among these three, mangrove rice
probabTy shows a greater potentiaT because of the extensive, yet
untapped, mangrove Tands in the Tower river. SpecificaTTy, it is
recommended that the government undertake to bude extensive causeways
on the mangrove swamps to reduce waTking time between fiers and to
and from the viTTage. The bonds of the causeways coqu be designed

in such a way as to achieve some amount of water controT on the fiers.
It is aTso recommended that farmers cuTtivating these systems be
exposed to the same TeveT of input deTivery systems, such as improved
seed, supervision, and other faciTities that are made avaiTabTe to
irrigated rice farmers.

The resuTts have shown that irrigated rice is more expensive
to produce than the other systems of rice cuTtivation. However,
because of weather uncertainties and the need to reduce dependency on
the outside woer, irrigated rice cuTtivation may offer a greater
benefit to the country than is refTected in the economic anaTysis.
Given that the government is committed to pursuing rice seTf-sufficiency
through an expansion of irrigated rice production, there are certain
issues that need to be addressed. There is a need for the government
to baTance the economic costs of greater seTf-sufficiency against the

gains in terms of security and a sense of reduced dependence. A simpTe

anaTysis in this study showed that a poTicy designed to achieve

 

283

seTf-sufficiency in rice through an expansion of irrigated rice pro—
duction wiTT reduce the gross nationaT product over a wide range of
rice and groundnut woer prices.

The Gambia has yet to Tearn from its experience of about
30 years of irrigated rice production. It appears as if most of
the mistakes in past projects are being repeated in succeeding irri-
gation projects. It is suggested that aTT aspects of past irrigation
projects be carefuTTy studied with a view to identifying key factors
that caused their faiTures and that an attempt shoqu be made to
eTiminate such factors in succeeding projects. This is especiaTTy
important for the proposed extensive irrigation projects. Farmers,
maTe and femaTe, and extension workers shoqu be thoroughTy trained
in irrigated rice production method and management. This may require
a period of about five to ten years.

In the existing irrigation perimeters, farmers shoqu be
encouraged to use their fiers for both the wet and dry season crops.
This wiTT at Teast heTp in maintaining the fiers and channeTs in
good order and so avoid the possibiTity of abandonment. ATthough
the emphasis in using the irrigated perimeters wiTT be on rice cuTti-
vation, farmers who find it impossibTe to use their fiers because of
Tabor shortages shoqu be encouraged to grow other upTand cereaTs on
these perimeters. Farmers shoqu aTso be encouraged to empToy animaT
traction in the pTowing of irrigated rice fiers as is done in other
countries such as SenegaT and MaTi. This wiTT reduce the need for

power fiTTers.

 

 

284

Input DeTivery

 

The use of fertiTizer during the year of the survey was very
Tow. Farmers compTained about the Tack of fertiTizer and improved
seed for use in both rice cuTtivation and upTand crops. Steps shoqu
be taken to ensure that the intensification of rice production is
pursued concurrentTy with an organized timeTy input deTivery system.
The possibiTity of the use of transport trucks during the groundnut
trading season for fertiTizer transportation shoqu be investigated.
Empty trucks from the depot areas coqu easiTy be used to transport
fertiTizers to the buying centers at TittTe extra cost. The author
beTieves that farmers are more TikeTy to buy fertiTizer at this time
of the year because farmers have money at this time to pay for fer—
tiTizer in cash.

As rice production increases, there is an urgent need for
processing faciTities, especiaTTy for miTTing. The government shoqu
either encourage private entrepreneurs to Tocate smaTT rice miTTing
machines in strategic Tocations around the country or it shoqu
encourage the viTTage cooperative societies to buy and instaTT smaTT

rice miTTs.

_AgricuTturaT Credit

ATthough an AgricuTturaT DeveTopment Bank has been opened in
BanjuT, its impact on the ruraT popuTation in the short run wiTT be
minimaT. The ruraT popuTation can be better reached through the cur-

rent c00perative credit system. However, the credit currentTy pro-

vided by the cooperatives is of a subsistence nature. Cooperative

 

 

 

 

 

 

285

members receive 0200 or one—third of their groundnut saTe, whichever

is smaTTer, as subsistence credit to be used during the hungry

season. This system of giving credit doesn't take cognizance of need
and is biased in favor of Targe farmers. It is recommended that the
subsistence credit be phased out and be repTaced by a production credit
which can be disbursed on the basis of need. Emphasis shoqu be pTaced

on giving credit in kind in the form of needed inputs.

UpTand CereaTs Improvement

DeveTopment programs designed to improve the cuTtivation of
upTand cereaTs shoqu not put emphasis on one cereaT aTone. The
resuTts of this study showed that there was a tendency for certain
regions of the country to concentrate on one upTand cereaT cuTtivation.
It is, therefore, recommended that upTand cereaT deveTopment efforts

be region specific in order to avoid regionaT imbaTances.

Areas for Further Research

 

This study was Timited in scope in that it concentrated on
rice farmers. It was, however, successfuT in generating a data base
on the economics of rice production, groundnuts, and upTand cereaTs cuT—
tivation. There is now a need for a more broadTy based study that wiTT
investigate the totaT farming system, incTuding the aspect of crop and
Tivestock integration. Data currentTy being coTTected by the Mixed
Farming Center in Abuko, The Gambia, wiTT shed some Tight on this
broader aspect. SpecificaTTy, studies are needed on:

a. the roTe of women in the househon economy and the

impact of technoTogicaT change on the structure of

 

 

286

the famiTy and the aTTocation of maTe and femaTe
Tabor

b. the sociaT, economic, and environment impact of

the proposed bridge—barrage at YeTitenda

c. the effect of aTternative deveTopment strategies

on income distribution and migration among the
ruraT popuTation

d. the effect of increasing grain prices on the urban

consumers and on

e. the economics of Tivestock production and crop

and Tivestock diversification

With the intensification of rice production, agronomic studies
designed to investigate the effects ofchanging cuTturaT practices
shoqu be carried out. For exampTe, experiments shoqu be designed
to study the effect of pTant popuTation density and fertiTizer combina-
tion on the yier of aTT rice systems using different rice varieties.
Since improved varieties are often unavaiTabTe, a nationaT program
designed to seTect high yiering TocaT varieties shoqu be carried
out.

It is necessary to carry out a post-harvest crop Toss study
to determine the extent of food grain Toss after harvest and to make
recommendations on food storage and processing in The Gambia.

FinaTTy, there is an urgent need for an operationaT method
of vaTuing famiTy Tabor in both the financiaT and economic anaTysis

of peasant agricuTture. Current methods that are avaiTabTe are

 

287

either too theoreticaTTy compTex to be of practicaT use or assume
certain conditions that are not appTicabTe to third woer countries

or require data that are impossibTe to obtain accurateTy.

 

 

APPENDICES

288

APPENDIX A

INPUT/OUTPUT DATA ON COTTON

289

 

 

 

TABLE A-1.--Cotten Enterprise Budget per Hectare

 

 

Amount Price/Unit VaTue
DaTasis (DaTasis)
A. Enterprise Characteristics
1. No. of Househons 4 -- --
2. Average Honings 0.38 ha -- -_
B. Income and Expenditure
1. VaTue of output 1182 kgs 0.53 626.46
2. VariabTe Costs
Seeda
FertiTizera
Insecticidea
Contract Tabor 14.1 wds 1.97 27.78
Hired Ox-equipment
TOTAL VariabTe Costs 27.78
3. Gross Margins 598.68
4. Fixed Costs
Strange Farmer 93.8 wds 4.80 450.24
Depreciationb 27 hrs 0.66 17.82
5. Returns to Tand,
famiTy Tabor, and
management f 130.62
6. Opportunity cost 0
capitaT (15%) 27-28 4.09
7. Net returns to Tand,
famiTy Tabor, and
management f 126.53
8. O ortunit cost 0
ngd y 1 ha 0.00 0.00
9. Net return to famiTy
Tabor and management 125 53
10. Return per workday to
famiTy Tabor and
management 134 Wd 0.94

 

Source: Survey Data

a ' ' timated that at current
These in uts are supaned free. It was es _
subsidized priges farmers woqu have paid about 0270.00 for these inputs.

QuantitiesappTied of these inputs were difficuTt to verify.

bAnimaT/ox-equipment depreciation.
been assumed to be negTigibTe.

Depreciation for hand tooTs has

290

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

291

o.ooH m.HeN o.ooH . H.00H o.ooH m.vHH o.ooH H.HH o.ooH o.mH HaazH momeH H<Hoe
H.m e.m~ N.m m.a N.NH H.4H LoamH ethz Hmuoe
mw Pmeu uumLucoo
H.8H H.eH mmHmz Huetacoo
memsmm mmcmgoxu
m.m m.m mmHoz macaeaxu eth:
m.mm m.mm ~.mm e.mm o.ow e.om H.mN H.N o.em H.m tastea aaemtpm
m.Hm H.4NH o.mm m.mm N.Ho o.oa o.on o.o o.oe m.m psaeH toaaH sHHEaa Hench
o.H m.~ . ~.N m.~ HHHsaa tozuo .o
e.a o.mH m.eH e.mH e.H e.H maH~Ema Hugo»
mg> om Lo>o
we» muo
e.e m.m m.H we» mHuoH
e.mH H.mH m.o we» oeuoH maHmEma .a
H.me N.eoH m.¢H e.mH o.sm m.mm m.on o.m o.oe m.m mmHez Hapop
we» mno
m.e N.m o.m at» mHuoH
e.~m N.0H m.~e o.o m.a at» oeumH maHmz .m
apvsmm

 

& mxmuxgoz x mzmvxcoz N mxmcxcoz & mzmuxcoz N mxmuxcoz

 

 

 

coppasHHH=u
menu

cowumcmgmca

Hope» mcHumm>ch ocmH

aercaHa

$3.52 new .8an we we: ,3 233335 :8qu E 5.53.235 conflnndé 39:

Workdays per Hectare

 

292

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

64.2
60 ‘
52.9 53-3
47.4
40»
20-
11.3
8.1
0.31'7 l
J F M A M J J A S O N 0
Months

Figure A—1.--MonthTy Labor Distribution in Cotton CuTtivation.

 

APPENDIX 8

MONTHLY LABOR INPUTS BY TYPE OF FARMING SYSTEM

293

 

 

.mcoccw mchcsoc Ho mmswumn mHmpop Hesse Ho: Ame mpsacH Loan HHEHCOE wcu Ho Ezm «LN proz

.mpmo Hw>csm ”moczom

 

 

 

mom wwH mm Nmm mme NoH m wow wow wN mm Hoe HmHON
om mH H NN Nm HH H oe me a N «Mi. LwnEwuwo
mo mH H me mm mH uu mm mm m N ea LwnEw>oz
mm ON H Hm em mH nn HH HN m H we emnopuo
mN mH H Nm Hm a nu Ne NoH N H mm LmnEwHamm
mN NH H mm em N uu Nm mm H uu em Hmsmz<
ON 0H m Nm mm H H mm Hm N N Nm NHse
me HH e mm mm mH H mm ee e m mm wean
em NH m eH NN Hm H m NN m m 0H Hm:
mm NH m mH mm NH nn m m m e uu HHLQ<
mm om m 0H NN NH nu m HH N a un Luce:
Hm wH m un NH 0H nu H om w m mm Hansenma
ON NH H N mm NH N NH we mH N NH Neeseeq
H.H H.H H.H
conwm oon vammHLLH conwm muHm mumwmm :onmm muHx m>osmcmz

 

avenge tea HmNaexcoz eHV HHH>HHU< ace eonam Ne HsaeH coaaH NHeHeoz--. H.H HHm<H

294

 

295

.9658 mcwvcaoc No 3:33 H38, :33 no: .85 3:9: Lop: 35:9: 9:. ..5 .55 win

 

 

 

mums >0>Lzm ”Quezom

mow moH mm wow mom mNH NH Nmm HS. 3: NH SN :53.
a. El N] w! Mel ml! HI Hlmnn an m4! U M. $8.38
Nm 3 N em NV 3 H mm mm 3 nu 2 L353:
HN B H mm 3 NH uu Nm mm 3 H 3 L388

2H 3 uu NHH NN m H No 3H NH H N 825383

2 N uu mm ww m nu Nm me 3 H em umzmz<

mm N H N mm m N mm Ne m m cm 32.

Nm m N Nm Ne m m mm He HH N N 8:3.

He NH 0 NN ...N HH m H mm N H S a:

N HH o m HN NH N N om 0N N w TEEN

mH 2 v N HN S N m NN NH m m 5.52

N 3 H mm NN NH N w 8 ON N H c2833

mN HN H mm mm 3 N NH AN 3 H w H.523

:38 ”NM Hmfimmw 395 :38. mummy Hemmmmo 30.5 :53 Wham—m Hemmmmo 398 5:02

3.2.. 538: 295

 

338 .6; 3.33.83 :3 3:32 2;. mezzo: 9:5 hHo gm 3 “:9: .5an Deucoznn. N . N NE:

 

 

REFERENCES

296

REFERENCES

Agency for InternationaT DeveTopment (A10). ”Gambia SoiT and Water
Management.“ Project No. 635—0202, 1977.

"Country DeveTopment SmaTT Program Statement: Gambia.“
January 1979.

Brown, M. L. Farm Budgets: From Farm Income AnaTysis to AgricuTturaT
Project AnaTysis. Woer Bank Staff OccasionaT Papers No. 29,
The John Hopkins University Press, BaTtimore and London, 1979.

ByerTee, 0., C. K. Eicher, C. Liedhon, and D. S. C. Spencer. "RuraT
EmpToyment in TropicaT Africa: Summary of Findings.“ African
RuraT Economy Program. Working Paper No. 20. Department of
AgricuTturaT Economics, Michigan State University, East Lansing,
Michigan, and Department of AgricuTturaT Economics, NjaTa
University CoTTege, NjaTa, Sierra Leone, 1977.

Center for Research on Economic DeveTopment (CRED). “The Gambia,“
Marketing, Price PoTicy and Storage of Food Grains in the
SaheT: A Survey. VoTume II: Country Studies. CILSS, CTub
du SaheT, Working Group on Marketing, Price PoTicy and Stor-
age. The University of Michigan, August 1977.

CTeave, J. H. African Farmers; Labor Use in the DeveTppment of SmaTT
Honer AgricuTture. New York, Washington, and London:
Praeger PubTishers, 1974.

Craven, K., and A. H. TuTuy. “Rice PoTicy in SenegaT.” Rice in West
Africa: PoTicy and Economics. Eds. S. R. Pearson, J. 0.
Stryker, and C. P. Humphreys. Stanford, CaTif.: Stanford
University Press, 1981, pp. 229—262.

Dey, J. “The Socio—Economic Organization of Farming in The Gambia
and its ReTevance for AgricuTturaT DeveTopment PTanning.“
AgricuTturaT Administration Network Papers, Overseas 0eveTop~
ment Institute, London, 1980.

“Gambian Women: UnequaT Partners in Rice DeveTopment

Projects “ The JournaT of DeveTopment Studies 17, No. 3
(ApriT 1981), pp. 109—122.

297

Dey, J.

DiTTon,

298

"DeveTopment PTanning in The Gambia: The Gap Between PTannersl
and Farmers'Perceptions, Expectations, and Objectives.”
Woer DeveTopment, 10, No. 5 (1982), pp. 377-396.

 

J. I., and J. Brian Hardaker. Farm Management Research for
SmaTT Farmer DeveTopment. FAO AgricuTturaT Services BuTTetin

 

 

41. Food and AgricuTture Organization of the United Nations,
Rome, 1980.

Dunsmore, J. R., A. G. Rains, G. D. N. Lowe, 0. J. Moffatt, I. P.

Eicher,

Eponou,

Fane, Z.

FranzeT,

Anderson, and J. B. WiTTiams. “The AgricuTturaT DeveTopment
of The Gambia: An AgricuTturaT, EnvironmentaT, and Socio-
economic AnaTysis." Land Resources Study 22, Land Resources
Division, Ministry of Overseas DeveTopment, ToTworth Tower,
Surbiton, Surrey, EngTand KT 6 7DY, 1976.

C. K. and 0. C. Baker. "Research on AgricuTturaT DeveTopment
in Sub—Saharan Africa: A CriticaT Survey." Michigan State
University InternationaT DeveTopment Paper No. 1. Department
of AgricuTturaT Economics, Michigan State University, East
Lansing, Michigan, 1982.

T. Farm LeveT AnaTysis of Rice Production Systems in North—
western Ivory Coast. UnpubTished Ph.D. Dissertation, Depart-

 

 

ment of AgricuTturaT Economics, Michigan State University,
1982.

”Etude des Circuits de CommerciaTisation du riz dans Te
Nord Ouest de Ta Cote d'Ivoire.” Memoire de Fin d'Etude.
ENSA, MontpeTTier, 1981. ‘

 

S. "An Interim EvaTuation of Two AgricuTturaT Production
Projects in SenegaT: The Economics of Rainfed and Irrigated
AgricuTture.“ African RuraT Economy Program, Working Paper
No. 28, Department of AgricuTturaT Economics, Michigan State
University, East Lansing, Michigan, June 1979.

Friedrich, K. H. Farm Management Data CoTTection and AnaTysis: An

Gambia,

 

ETectronic Data Processing Storage and RetrievaT System.

 

FAO AgricuTturaT Services BuTTetin No. 34. Food and AgricuTture
Organization of the United Nations, Rome, 1977.

The RepubTic of the. "Five Year PTan for Economic and SociaT
DeveTopment, 1975/76-1979—80.f BanjuT, 1975.

"Preparation Report, RuraT DeveTopment Programme 1980-85.”
Annex 2, Review of the RuraT DeveTopment Programme, Phase 1,
1976-1979, JuTy 1979.

. "Five Year PTan for Economic and SociaT DeveTopment, 1981/82-
1985/86.“ BanjuT, 1981.

 

 

 

299

Gambia, The RepubTic of the. "MonthTy RainfaTT Data for The Gambia to
1980.’I Department of Water Resources, Ministry of Water

Resources and Environment, 7 Marnia Parade, BanjuT, The Gambia,
1982.

“Report of AnnuaT RainfaTT 1981.‘l Department of Water
Resources. Ministry of Water Resources and Environment,
Government Printer, 1982.

. “CentraT Bank of The Gambia BuTTetin." QuarterTy 4,
October-December, 1975.

. "CentraT Bank of The Gambia BuTTetin." QuarterTy 4, October-
December, 1982.

GambTe, David P. Kerewan: An AnaTysis of the Economic Conditions and
the UnderTying Factors in a Gambian Mandika ViTTage. Unpub-
Tished Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of AnthropoTogyu Uni-
versity of London, 1958.

Gittinger, J. P. Economic AnaTysis of AgricuTturaT Projects. The
Economic DeveTopment Institute, InternationaT Bank for Recon-
struction and DeveTopment, The John Hopkins University Press,
BaTtimore and London, 1972.

Grant, N. W. ”Nutrition Fier Working Party. Food Consumption Data.”
CoToniaT Office/20032. London: HMSO, 1950. Mimeograph.

Harsh, S. B., L. J. Connor, and G. D. Schwab. Managing the Farm

Business. EngTewood CTiffs, N.J.: Prentice-HaTT Inc.,
1981.

 

HasweTT, M. R. The Nature of Poverty. New York: St. Martins Press,
1975.

 

"LongitudinaT AnaTysis of AgricuTturaT Change: A Study
of SociaT and Economic DecTine." CiviTizations 27 (1977),
pp. 261-272. '

 

InternationaT Bank for Reconstruction and DeveTopment and InternationaT
DeveTopment Association (IBRD/IDA). "AppraisaT of An Agri-
cuTturaT DeveTopment Project, The Gambia." AgricuTture
Projects Department, August 8, 1972.

Kamuanga, M. Farm LeveT Study of the Rice Production System at the
Office Du Niger in MaTi: An Economic AnaTysis. UnpubTished
Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of AgricuTturaT Economics,
Michigan State University, 1982.

Kagbo, R. "Letter to Author.” January, 1983.

 

 

 

...-p”;—

300

KearT, B., ed. Fier Data CoTTection in the SociaT Sciences: Expe-
riences in Africa and the MiddTe East. AgricuTturaT DeveTop-
ment CounciT, Inc. New York, 1976.

KeTTy, V. A. "A Research ProposaT for a CriticaT Study of the Use of
Shadow Wage Rates in Economic AnaTysis." JuTy 1983.

Low, A. R. C. "Linear Programming and the Study of Peasant Farming
Situations: A RepTy." JournaT of AgricuTturaT Economics 29,
No. 2 (May 1978).

Lowe, G. V. N. "Land Tenure and Land Use.” In The AgricuTturaT
DeveTopment of The Gambia: An AgricuTturaT, EnvironmentaT
and Socioeconomic AnaTysis. Ed. by J. R. Dunsmore, A. G.
Rains, G. D. N. Lowe, D. J. Moffatt, I. P. Anderson, and
J. B. WiTTiams. Land Resources Study 22, Land Resources
Division, Ministry of Overseas DeveTopment, ToTworth Tower,
Surbiton, Surrey, EngTand KT 6 7DY, 1976.

Lynch, S. ”The Interview PTan." In "Househon Food Consumption in
RuraT Sierra Leone.” RuraT DeveTopment Series, Working Paper
No. 7. Department of AgricuTturaT Economics, Michigan State
University, East Lansing, Michigan, 1979.

Mettrick, H. with 0. C. Kemp. Oxenisation in The Gambia: An EvaTuation.

University of Reading, January 1980.

Netting, R. McC., David CTeveTand, and Francis Stier. "The Conditions
of AgricuTturaT Intensification in the West African Savannah “
SaheTian SociaT DeveTopment. RegionaT Economic DeveTopment
Services Office, West Africa, USAID, Abidjan, 1980, PP. 187-
506.

Norman, D. W. ”Economic AnaTysis of AgricuTturaT Production and
Labor UtiTization Among the Hausa in the North of Nigeria.”
African RuraT Economy Study, African RuraT EmpToyment Paper
No. 4. Department of AgricuTturaT Economics, Michigan State
University, East Lansing, Michigan, January 1973b.

”MethodoTogy and ProbTems of Farm Management Investiga—
tions: Experiences from Northern Nigeria ” African RuraT
EmpToyment Paper, No. 8. Department of AgricuTturaT Econ-
omics. Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan,
1973.

, I. Ouedraogo, and M. Newman. The Farmer in the Semi—Arid
Tropics of West Africa. Interpretative Review of the Litera-
ture, VoT. 1. Prepared for ICRISAT, Hyderabad, India,
February 1979.

301

Pearson, S. R., J. D. StryTer, and C. P. Humphreys, eds. Rice in
West Africa: PoTicy and Economics. Stanford, CaTif.:
Stanford University Press, 1981.

 

Peter, 0., Jean Le BToas, N. Kehmeier, and M. Raymond. "DeveTopment
of Irrigated AgricuTture in Gambia: GeneraT Overview and
Prospects--ProposaTs for a Second Programme 1980—1985.“

CTub Du SaheT/CILSS. SaheT 0(79)48, October 1979.

Quinn, C. A. Mandingo Kingdoms of the Sengambia: TraditionaTism,
IsTam, and European Expansion. Chicago: Northwestern Uni—
versity Press, 1972.

 

 

Spencer, 0. S. C. “Micro-LeveT Farm Management and Production Econ-
omics Research Among TraditionaT African Farmers: Lessons
from Sierra Leone ” African RuraT Economy EmpToyment Paper
No. 3. Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI.: Depart—
ment of AgricuTturaT Economics, September 1972.

, I. I. May—Parker, and Frank S. Rose. ”EmpToyment, Efficiency,
and Income in the Rice Processing Industry of Sierra Leone.”
African RuraT Economy Program, African RuraT Economy Paper

No. 15. Department of AgricuTturaT Economics, Michigan State
University, East Lansing, Michigan, and Department of Agri-
cuTturaT Economics, NjaTa University CoTTege, University of
Sierra Leone, NjaTa, Sierra Leone, 1976.

, D. ByerTee, and S. FranzeT. ”AnnuaT Costs, Returns, and
SeasonaT Labor Requirements for SeTected Farm and Non—Farm
Enterprises in RuraT Sierra Leone.” African RuraT Economy
Program, Working Paper No. 27. Department of AgricuTturaT
Economics, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan,
and Department of AgricuTturaT Economics, NjaTa University
CoTTege, University of Sierra Leone, NjaTa, Sierra Leone,

May 1979.

Ssentongo, K. ”An Economic Survey of the High ATtitude Areas of
AnkoTe." Uganda Ministry of AgricuTture, Forestry and
Cooperatives, 1973.

Thomas, R. A. ”Food Production Efforts in The Gambia.” Papers pre—
sented at the 2nd Senior Staff Conference Her at Yundum,
6th to 14th ApriT 1981, VoT. 11 Appendices, Department of
AgricuTture, Appendix V.

ToTTens, E. F. I'ProbTems of Micro—Economic Data CoTTection on Farms
in Northern Zaire: African RuraT EmpToyment Research Network,
Working Paper No. 7. Michigan State University, East Lansing,
Mi.: Department of AgricuTturaT Economics, June 1975.

 

302

United NationaT Sudano-SaheTian Office (UNSO). "Assessment of the
ProbTem of Ongoing and Proposed Activities to ImpTement the
PTan of Action to Combat Desertification in UnaRepubTic of
The Gambia." New York, October 1979.

Upton, M. Farm Management in Africa: The PrincipTes of Production
and PTanning. London: Oxford University Press, 1973.

 

 

Van der PTas, C. 0. "Rice Situation in The Gambia with SpeciaT Regard
to the InfTuence of FToods in the River.” Bathurst: Govern-
ment Printer, 1958.

Weckstein, R. S. "Shadow Prices and Project.EvaTuationinnLess DeveT—
oped Countries." Economic DeveTopment and CuTturaT Change
20 (ApriT 1972), pp. 474-494.

 

WeiT, P. M. Mandinka Mansaya: The RoTe of the Mandinka in the
PoTiticaT System of The Gambia. Ph.D. Dissertation, University
of Oregon, Eugene, Oregon, 1968. ‘

 

 

"Wet Rice, Women, and Adaptation in The Gambia.” RuraT
Africana, Current Research in the SociaT Sciences. Agri-
cuTturaT DeveTopment and EmpToyment, No. 19‘(Winter 1973),
pp. 20-29.

 

West Africa Rice DeveTopment Association. Rice Statistics Yearbook
(Abstracts). 3rd edition, 1979.

 

Rice Statistics Yearbook (Abstracts). 4th Edition, 1981.

 

Winch, F. E. III. Costs and Returns of ATternative Rice Production
Systems in Northern Ghana: Implications for Output, EmpToy-
ment, and Income Distribution. Ph.D. Dissertation, Department

 

 

 

of AgricuTturaT Economics, Michigan State University, 1976.

 

 

 

1'
y,‘ Mch IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII .

: nnTIT(in(InininunniunnninniniTIT!n

2