Wheat supply in Kenya: production technologies, sources of inefficiency, and potential for productivity growth

Abstract

Kenya is projected to remain a net importer of wheat to the end of this century. To reduce the growing dependence on imports, the government has proposed measures to stimulate domestic production and curb wheat consumption. In addition to providing price incentives to wheat producers and expanding wheat areas into marginal lands, the government has encouraged the intensification of wheat research. However, research must take into account the fact that the wheat supply sector in Kenya has changed greatly since Independence. Wheat production is no longer confined to large farms in the medium- and high-potential zones. The subdivision and redistribution of much former wheat land has led to the emergence of small-scale wheat farming as an important element in the wheat supply sector. Scarcity of arable land and stiff competition from higher value enterprises such as maize and dairying in the high potential areas have encouraged wheat production to expand into the marginal zones of Narok/Trans Mara and Samburu. Research to generate production technologies appropriate for small-scale farmers' circumstances and marginal areas has just been initiated and remains insufficient. Most of the available technologies were developed for and adapted by large-scale producers in the high-potential zone. Farmers in different agroecological zones, both large- and small-scale producers, face different constraints and need different technology and policy interventions if they are to produce wheat more efficiently. Unfortunately, little up-to-date information is available on the practices and problems of small-scale wheat farmers and wheat production in marginal areas. To streamline and accelerate wheat production in Kenya, information on priority problems and their possible solutions is essential. This study is an initial effort to diagnose the important wheat production problems in Kenya. Aside from focusing mostly on the high-potential wheat production areas, research recommendations for wheat farmers in Kenya generally have been based on trial results. Little on-farm research contributed to the design and generation of wheat technologies. Financial limitations and the lack of research orientation towards understanding and solving farmers' problems prevented the National Plant Breeding Research Centre (NPBRC) from verifying and testing wheat technologies under farmers' conditions. Insufficient information about farmers' practices and the performance of research recommendations in farmers' fields has made it difficult to understand the reasons for the large differential between yields obtained by researchers and most farmers. Production constraints are not well understood and cannot be alleviated, because ways for research to make an impact cannot be identified. The main motivation for this study was to bridge this information gap. More specific objectives of the study included: 1) to survey and analyze wheat production practices followed by farmers across agroecological zones and farm sizes; 2) to survey the enterprises competing with wheat for the country's agricultural resources and the technologies employed; (3) to analyze farmers' assessment and application of wheat technologies recommended by researchers, examine the sources of inefficiency in wheat production and constraints to increasing productivity, and define the potential impacts of wheat research for various groups of farmers and production regions; (4) to specify and measure technology parameters and evaluate the profitability of wheat under the different production systems identified; and (5) to use these findings to identify technological and policy interventions for improving wheat production. Data were collected from a sample of wheat farmers in Narok, Nakuru, and Uasin Gishu Districts, where more than 80% of Kenya's wheat is produced. A multistage stratified random sample of 97 farmers was selected from the three districts. Sample farmers were interviewed twice using a structured questionnaire during the 1990 agricultural season. The first visit followed land preparation and planting; the second was made after harvesting