Evaluating Power of Information and Coffee-Variety Choice on Smallholder Farmers’ Yields in West of Rift, Kenya

Abstract

Coffee (Coffea sp.) is an important crop globally, employing millions along its value chain. It is the second most traded commodity after oil and the most consumed beverage in the world. In Kenya, it is one of the largest foreign exchange earners, grown by about 800,000 smallholder farmers and supporting many livelihoods. Its productivity, however, is hampered by several factors; climate change, pests, diseases, socioeconomic factors and technology adoption levels. Technology adoption is a process in which information acquisition is a prerequisite. The current study investigated the power of information and coffee variety choice on the yields of smallholder coffee farmers in West of Rift, Kenya. The study adopted an ex-post facto survey design and data were collected using semi-structured interview schedules from 140 farmers sampled through purposive and multi-stage sampling schemes. Farmers’ Agronomic information were measured using self-evaluation ranking scales (1-10), coffee varieties were separated into ‘new’ and ‘traditional’ and reported yields were measured in kilograms of cherry/tree. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used in the analysis, computed by SPSS. Ruiru 11 variety dominated (53%), Batian (22%), K7 (18%) and SL28 (6%). New variety (Ruiru 11 and Batian) growers’ had significantly higher agronomic information score than traditional (K7 and SL28) as tested by Mann-Whitney U-test; U (N1=35, N2 =14) =143.500, Z = -2.295, P < .05. The ‘new’ variety growers had significantly higher mean yields compared to ‘traditional’; t (47) = 2.108, P = .040. Crop nutrition and canopy management were dominant areas of information needs. In conclusion, farmers with higher self-reported levels of agronomic information preferred new higher yielding disease resistant varieties and recorded higher yields. The linkage between farmers’ information levels, variety choice and yields is confirmed. It is recommended, information asymmetries needs to be addressed.