Sweetpotato value chain development in West Africa: matching products with farmer typology.

Abstract

Abstract Sweetpotato value chain studies conducted in 2012 in three West African countries - Ghana, Nigeria and Burkina Faso - indicated three types of sweetpotato producers. Type I farmers specialize in sweetpotato production, making it the most important cash crop for their farm. Type II farmers grow sweetpotato as one of the cash crops and sweetpotato may rank second or third among these cash crops. Type III farmers are those who grow it mainly for home consumption though still sell a part of the roots due to perishability. The marketing assessment indicated three potential product value chains worth developing, each appropriate for different types of producers. The fresh root value chain is well suited for Types I and II farmers for obvious reasons. Potential interventions to improve the system include: (i) breeding/selection of high-yielding varieties with the characteristics acceptable to the markets; (ii) best practices for production including ridging and weeding technologies to reduce labour inputs, appropriate fertilizer application, identifying best intercropping practices; and (iii) organizing farmers to connect to the national collectors directly to reduce costs and time spent on individual marketing efforts. Sweetpotato as livestock feed is best suited for Type I farmers, though it may be appropriate for some Type II farmers. These farmers typically allocate large amounts of land to sweetpotato production, thus producing an abundance of vines at the time of harvest once, twice or even three times a year. They also produce lots of low-value and no-value small roots. These vines and roots would yield much better value if converted into feed that translates to meat or milk production. A better developed livestock system contributes in turn to improved soil fertility important to sweetpotato production. Orange-fleshed sweetpotato (OFSP) is suited for developing as a home consumption product for all types, particularly Type III, farmers, who grow sweetpotato mainly for consumption. Promoting a product with more nutritional value for the family, particularly children, would be a good substitute for the local varieties. As OFSP lacks the characteristics sought by buyers in the market, until a serious and long-term awareness campaign has increased the awareness of OFSP in the markets, it should be treated principally as a product for home consumption, not commercialization.