PRODUCTION AND MARKET[NG OF COFFEE IN KENYA: A CASE OF
GIKONDI LOCATION, NYERI COUNTY.
BY
KIMA THI CHARITY NJERI
C153/CTY/PTI27199/11
A RESEARCH PROJECT SUBMITTED TO THE SCHOOL OF
HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF
THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE AWARD OF THE DEGREE OF MASTER
OF PUBLIC POLICY AND ADMINISTRATION, KENYATTA UNIVERSITY.
APRIL 2015
DECLARATION
Declaration by the Candidate
I hereby declare that this project is my original work and has not been submitted to
any other university for the award.of a degree.
Signature $ Date~-
Charity Njeri
Reg: CI53/PT/CTY/27199/2011
This project has been submitted with my approval as the University Supervisor,
Dr. Felix Kirllthll.
1st supervisor
Signature~ Date
2nd S .upervisor,
Me. Weldon?ill
Signature __ ~,,-,,-~+---,------,~~ Date~
Department of Public Policy & Administration of Kenyatta University.
DEDICATION
This research project is dedicated to late my father, Mr. David Kimathi Waigera, a
solid rock in my life and a renowned coffee farmer and leader in Nyeri County. Your
valuable insights as a father and a mentor live on long after you are gone. Because of
you, I will go the distance.
II
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
I am grateful to God for the support and advice accorded to me in the course of my
studies by the entire faculty of Public Policy and Administration. I specifically want
to acknowledge Dr. Felix Kiruthu and Mr. Weldon Ngeno who were my supervisors
for the key role they have played in shaping my work and guiding me in every step of
this project, my sincere gratitude to you.
Finally, I salute my family, friends, librarians and many others for the invaluable
assistance they have extended to me in support of this project, God bless you.
III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DECLARA nON i
DEDICATION ii
ACKNOLEDGEMENT iii
ABSTRACT iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS v
LIST OF TABLES ix
UST OF FIGURES x
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS xi
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Background of the Study 1
1.2 Statement of the Problem 4
1.3 Research Questions 4
1.4 Study Objectives 4
1.5 Research Premises 5
1.6 Signi ficance of the Study 5
1.7 Scope and Limitations of the Study : 7
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW 9
2.1 Introduction 9
2.2 Theoretical Framework 9
v
2.3. Empirical Review 11
2.3.1 Coffee Production 11
2.3.2. Marketing of Coffee 14
2.3.3 Coffee's Competition 16
2.4 Summary & Gaps in Literature Review 17
2.5 Conceptual Framework 19
CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 21
3.1 Tntroduction 21
3.2 Research Design 21
3.3 Site of study 21
3.4 Target Population 22
3.5 Sample Size 23
3.6 Research Instruments 24
3.7 Data Collection procedures and methods 24
3.8 Data Analysis 25
CHAPTER FOUR: DATA ANALYSIS AND PRESENTATION 26
. 4.1 Introduction 26
4.2 Response Rate 26
4.3 Characteristics of Respondents 26
4.3.1 Respondents' Gender 26
4.3.2. Respondents Age 27
VI
4.3.3 Respondents' Marital Status 28
4.3.4 Respondents' Family Size 29
4.3.5. Respondents' Education Levels 30
4.3.6. Duration of Coffee Farming in Years 30
4.4. Challenges Experienced by Coffee Farmers 31
4.4.1. Challenges Experienced During Coffee Production 31
4.4.2. Marketing Challenges 35
4.4.3. Coffee's Competition from Alternative livelihood Sources .40
CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSION &
RECOMMENDATIONS 46
5.1 Introduction 46
5.2 Summary of findings .46
5.2.1 Production 46
5.2.2 Marketing 47
5.2.3 Alternatives to Coffee 48
5.3 Conclusion 48
5.3.1. Procluction , 49
5.3.2. Marketing : 50
5.3.3 Competition from alternative livelihood sources , 52
5.4. Recommendations 54
5.4.1 Production 54
Vll
5.4.2 Marketing 55
5.4.3 Competition from alternative livelihood sources 55
5.5. Area for Further Research 56
REFERENCES 57
APPENDICES 61
Appendix I: Question guide 61
Appendix II; List of Names of the Respondents 64
Appendix TH.Map ofGikondi Location 65
Appendix IV Research Permit. 66
V 111
LIST OF TABLES
Table l.Target Population Table 22
Table 2. Sample Size Table 23
Table 3: Respondents Sex 27
IX
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Conceptual Framework 19
Figure 3: Marital Status 29
Figure 4: Respondents' Family Size 29
Figure 5: Respondents' Education Level 30
Figure 6: Experience in Coffee Farming 31
Figure 7 Challenges related to coffee production 32
Figure 8. Challenges related to coffee marketing 36
Figure 9 Livelihood alternatives adopted by farmers in Gikondi Location 41
x
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
DFID Department For International Development
ICO International Coffee Organization.
KFA Kenya Farmers Association.
ICA International Coffee Agreement.
SLF Sustainable Livelihoods Framework.
KPCU Kenya Planters Cooperative Union.
SAPs Structural Adjustment Policies.
Xl
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of the Study
Coffee is a leading foreign exchange earners in the world with Brazil, Vietnam,
Colombia and Indonesia being leading producers. Coffee has provided many countries'
national governments with workable ingredients for developing agricultural export
economies (Baffes, 2004). Capital generated by coffee exports has allowed already
established local economic interests to accumulate huge fortunes which have in turn
seen them gain a foothold in both local and international markets. Today, Coffee
continues to generate significant public and private revenues with more than 5.5 million
metric tons being produced per year (Rice, 2006). In most of the coffee producing
countries, the crop is grown by small holders on acreages of less than 5 acres. It
therefore significantly impacts on the livelihoods of a large number of the population in
the coffee producing countries. Coffee as a cash crop has enjoyed popularity in East
Africa as well as across the continent for many years being grown by diverse countries.
In Africa, the leading producers of coffee are Ethiopia, Uganda, Ivory Coast, Tanzania
and Kenya.
In Kenya, the target country of the study, Coffee had for a long time been the country's
leading foreign exchange earner. In 1986 it accounted for 40% of total foreign exchange
earnings, but this was to remain the highest earnings thereafter. After that, coffee
contribution dropped continuously to stand at only 3% in 2010 (Mwangi & Okibo,
2010). For most of the last decade, the coffee industry in Kenya has been under great
stress occasioned by both a decline in prices in the international market as well as
falling production at home. According to (Owino, 2000), the major problems facing the
coffee industry have been brought about by structural changes, the decline in the
volumes of coffee production and adverse fluctuation in the world prices of primary
commodities. Additional challenges include declining soil productivity,
mismanagement and reduction in the land acreage available for coffee growing.
These challenges are, however, not unique to Kenya. According to Gowa (2001),
Uganda, another major exporter of coffee in Africa, faces similar challenges in the
sector such as acute shortages of inputs and soaring inflation, growing domestic and
external debts, decaying infrastructure, massive capital flight and declining per capita
income among others. These challenges emanate both from within the country as well
as from the external environment. Olukoshi, (1991) observes that Structural Adjustment
Policies (SAPs) are believed to have contributed to crises which have manifested
themselves not only in terms of rapidly declining output and productivity in the
industrial and agricultural sectors but also in terms of worsening payments and budget
deficits. Specifically, SAPs had a devastating effect on coffee production in Kenya
because they affected its cost of production by removal of agricultural subsidies,
making it too expensive for farmers to produce. As a result, farmers could not afford
input and, therefore, the actual tonnage produced plummeted.
Structural Adjustment Policies were introduced in Kenya in 198011981 as policy tools
for economic management. The adoption of SAPs was aimed at restoring efficiency in
all sectors of the economy and consequently raising the rate of economic growth. This
was in response to economic challenges that carne to the fore in the ] 970s and which
were complicated by the oil crisis. Other challenges facing the economy then included
the fluctuating prices of the country's major exports, low levels of t chnology, drought
and famine, high population growth, the collapse of the East African Community, high
2
urbanization rates, increasing debt, land fragmentation and widespread poverty among
others (Rono, 2002).
In Kenya however, SAPs failed to generate the expected conditions for sustainable
recovery. A number of economic sectors, agriculture included, continued performing
dismally in the face of removal of price controls, lack of agricultural subsidies and
attendant economic mismanagement. This poor performance was also recorded in
coffee growing. Beginning the 1990s, the government liberalized the coffee sector as
part of SAPs in the hope that this would generate increased production and lend the
sector to better management. However, more than two decades iater, coffee production
remains depressed and the industry mired in disillusionment and retrogression.
Coffee production in Kenya is done at two levels; large scale plantation agriculture
accounting for 35% and small scale holdings, accounting for about 65% of the output
(Karanja & Nyoro, 2002). The small scale farmers are organized into cooperatives for
ease of marketing. However, cooperatives have been bedeviled by mismanagement and
politics, leading to further decline in coffee output.
In Gikondi location of Nyeri County, the site of the current study, coffee remained the
sale cash crop and livelihood source for the rural population for much of the post
independent years. When the coffee crises set in the 1980s, farmers were adversely
impacted, leading to falling standards of living, increasing poverty levels and attendant
socio-economic challenges. This rural population, like others in Kenya has not been
able to recover from these shocks and remains extremely vulnerable today. The location
has a total population of 18,533 people (Kenya National Bureau of Statistics, 2010). It
is made lip of five sub-locations being Thimu, Karaba, Kiirungi, Karindi and Muthuthi-
1111.
3
1.2 Statement of the Problem
Decline of the coffee sector is also attributed to poor management (Mbataru, 2003). The
vulnerability context that coffee farmers in Gikondi location of Nyeri County find
themselves in today is as a result of the coffee shocks and stresses that begun in the
1980. These shocks and stresses are characterized by price fluctuations, declining
acreage, mismanagement of marketing channels and declining soil productivity among
others. This study sought to establish the nature of these challenges as they have
manifested among these farmers and how they have responded to them to restore and
enhance their livelihoods. Specifically, the study sought to find out how the challenges
in the coffee sector have impacted on production and marketing of coffee. It also sought
to establish the coping mechanisms and corrective strategies that farmers have adapted
to respond to these challenges.
1.3 Research Questions.
1. What are the production challenges experienced by coffee farmers in Gikoncli
location?,
2. What are the marketing challenges experienced by coffee farmers in Gikoncli
location?
3. What are the alternatives to coffee farming that farmers in Gikondi location
have adapted to earn a livelihood?
1.4 Study Objectives.
This study sought to;
4
1. Establish production challenges experienced by coffee farmers 111 Gikondi
location.
2. Examine marketing challenges expenences by coffee farmer 111 Gikondi
location.
3. Determine what alternatives sources of livelihoods farmers have adopted and
therefore providing competition to coffee farming.
1.5 Research Premises
1. Coffee farmers in Gikondi location face challenges in coffee production that are
both generalized and context specific; unique to the socio-economic and
political realities of the area.
2. Coffee farmers in Gikondi location face challenges in coffee marketing that are
both generalized and context specific; unique to the socio-economic and
political realities of the area.
3. Coffee farming 111 Gikondi location faces competition from alternative
livelihood sources.
1.6 Significance of the Study
Due to the long running challenges facing the coffee industry and the emergence of new
products in agriculture, coffee growing and management does not attract as much
interest from the public as it once did. In spite of this neglect, coffee continues to be the
source of livelihood to a number of small scale farmers who still rely on its proceeds
despite the down turn in fortunes. Therefore, it is important that studies such as these
5
continue to be undertaken to determine what ails the coffee sector. In Nyeri County,
while farmers have in recent years diversified into other cash crops like tea, horticulture
and dairy farming, coffee still continues to be the lead cash-crop and the major
livelihood source of the majority of the small scale fanners that dominate the
population of the County.
Gikondi location is located at the periphery of Nyeri County, bordering Murang'a
County. The location does not enjoy as good a road infrastructure as other parts of the
county due to its peripheral location. Therefore, the population has not been very quick
to benefit from some of the diversification initiatives that have been picked up
elsewhere in the County and which require good road infrastructure like dairy farming
and horticulture growing. Therefore, coffee still remains the population's economic
mainstay in spite of the challenges. The depressed state of coffee production and
attendant low income has led to a rise in social delinquency especially among the youth
occasioned by high rates of school dropout and unemployment. This study was
therefore crucial as it interrogated these challenges and proposed ways of reviving the
sector and restoring the population's livelihood source.
The study's finding was aimed at helping the area achieve the millennium's
development goals because once the coffee sector is revived and farmer can access
decent income, extreme levels of poverty will be eradicated and children will not only
have access to an education, but will also stay in school hence eradicating child labor.
Gender equality and women empowerment will he achieved as most fanners in Gikondi
division are women and youth, who if gainfully employed, social indicators like health,
security and education would go up translating to improved standard of living which
would create a conducive environment for and both local and international development
6
partnerships which is in line with Kenya's Vision 2030. This study was of main help to
coffee farmers in Gikondi as well as coffee marketing institution as it highlighted
challenges and proposed solutions. The study is also of importance to policy makers,
especially at the county level as they would come up with relevant specific policies to
address these challenges and more so those in the agricultural sector as it grapples with
some of the challenges they have been attempting to isolate in the sector.
1.7 Scope and Limitations of the Study.
The study focused on the challenges faced by fanners in the coffee sector in Gikondi
location during production and marketing of their produce. It also examined alternatives
available to farmers both in terms of agricultural commodities and other activ ities. The
research locale was confined to the area of jurisdiction of Gikondi location, and in its
five sub-locations namely Thimu, Karaba, Kiirungi, Karindi and Muthuthi-ini. The
study spanned between years 2000 and 20 I0, examining the challenges the coffee
fanners have faced and the competition the sector have faced from other sectors within
that time.
Carrying out a research on the challenges facing coffee farmers in Gikondi could have
been limited by non-cooperating respondents as a result of lack of trust with the
intention of the research. Unwillingness of the respondents to reveal information as it
was on the ground which could lead to poor quality of data which could fail to address
the study's objectives. To counteract this, the researcher assured respondents of
anonymity and confidentiality of any information given. The researcher further assured
the respondents. that the study would be for academic endeavor and for policy
formulating purposes and would not be traced back to them. Furthermore, the
7
respondents were informed of the important role the information availed could play in
terms of formulating policies which would in turn help improve the conditions in the
coffee sector. Data was also corroborated from various sources to eliminate bias and
gaps that could have arose in the course of data collection.
8
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW.
2.1 Introduction
In this chapter, the Department For International Development's (OFm) Sustainable
Livelihoods Framework and Social Capital Theory were used to provide a framework
for understanding challenges facing coffee farmers and why they make the choices they
clo in order to deal with these challenges. The chapter also examined literature related to
challenges facing coffee farmers in Kenya in order to understand what had already been
done in this field and identify gaps which the study sought to fill.
2.2 Theoretical Framework
This study was guided by the Social Capital Theory, as advanced by Pierre Bourdieu
and Robert D. Putnam. Social Capital may be defined as those resources inherent in
social relations that facilitate collective action. Social capital resources include trust,
norms, and networks of association representing any group which gathers consistently
for a common purpose. A norm of a culture high in social capital is reciprocity, which
encourages bargaining, compromise, and pluralistic politics. Another norm is belief in
the equality of citizens, which encourages the formation of cross-cutting groups
(Garson, 2006).
As already observed above, Social Capital is a broad concept that encompasses the
norms and networks facilitating collective actions for mutual benefits. This broad
definition, however, lends itself to various interpretations and usage. At one end of the
spectrum is the notion that social relations have the potential to facilitate the accrual of
economic or non-economic benefits to the individual. According to Coleman, one of the
9
leading proponents of the theory, social capital is one of the potential resources which
an actor can use alongside other resources like their skills and expertise. However,
social capital is not owned by the individual, rather it arises as a resource which is
available to them out of interactions with their environment (Coleman, 1988).
Bourdieu (1992) another leading proponent, notes that social capital is the sum of
resources, actual or virtual that accrues to an individual or a group by virtue of
possessing a durable network of more or less institutionalized relationships of mutual
acquaintance and recognition. Social capital is context specific and takes many forms
including obligations within a group, trust, norms sanctions with underlying
assumptions that the relationship between individuals is durable and subjectively felt.
The relationship themselves form the complex web of interactions and communications.
As a result, people belonging to a group are able to volunteer their time and services for
the benefit of all participants (Coleman, 1988). Based on this theory, people come
together and form groups like marketing institutions for mutual benefits. These
institutions for example coffee co-operative societies are expected to serve their needs,
both economic and social to the benefit of all members.
Coffee farming has been the economic back bone of farmers in Nyeri County (Mbataru,
2003). This means that it is through coffee proceeds that children could go to school,
fanners could access medical help, and business in the area thrives with the proceeds
from coffee as capital and with farmers as major market targets. With the introduction
of SAPs, coupled with the fall of coffee prices, and the split of the former Mukurwe-ini
co-operative society, most farmers in Gikondi have since either abandoned coffee
farming or pay scanty attention to the crop as it is no longer profitable. This has led to
the decline of the people's way of life; insecurity in the area has soared, children have
10
dropped out of school due to lack of school fees, the youths in the area have become
disillusioned and have resulted to consumption of cheap illicit brew while others have
joined the outlawed Mungiki sect; what was once a booming economy declined as
fanners purchasing power was greatly reduced and had limited access to livelihood
alternatives. The living standards of what was once a proud and prosperous community
has greatly declined leading to high poverty levels.
Bourdieu (1986) states that Social Capital is generated when people come together in
groups and networks that are based on reciprocity and from which they can mutually
derive benefits. In rural and poor communities such as that of Gikondi and partially
because of the sorry state of coffee farming in the area, farmers are organized in groups
based on kinship, social interests, economics and other variables to tackle the myriad
challenges that they face on a daily basis. Organizing for collective action in these
groups leads to improved bargaining power for higher prices, and better treatment from
marketing institutions, confidence in the way farmers deal with each other and
authorities in the area especially with regards to coffee growing and generally,
exchanging information all which lead to empowerment of the farmers.
2.3. Empirical Review
2.3.1 Coffee Production
After independence, the government adopted policies that favored heavy state
intervention in the economy. Consequently, parastatals and marketing boards were set
lip (0 oversee the production and marketing of most cash crops and other production
sectors. These were fully financed and controlled by the government. In the
agricultural sector, there were about 41 organizations and they controlled what was
11
produced, how it was produced and where it was to be marketed. In some cases like in
tea and sugar industry, the organizations also set both the consumer and producer
prices. Coffee growing and marketing was heavily controlled by cooperatives and the
Kenya Planters Cooperative Union (KPCU), a parastatal. This economic model worked
for the first one and a half decades but from late 70's and early 80's, it was evident that
economic growth had not only stagnated but they were indications of a downward
trend. However; this problem was not unique to Kenya but a common phenomenon to
many young African nations then (Mbataru, 2013).
Olukoshi (1998) notes that as a response to the economic challenges and state directed
economy, the Word Bank and the International Monitory Fund (IMF) introduced the
Structural Adjustment Programs (SAPS) and 'recommended' them to African countries.
These programs aimed to liberalize markets and cut back on state intervention in the
economy, confining to an enabler rather than a competitor for the private sector. In
agriculture and coffee to be precise, immediate effect was felt when all subsidies in
chemicals and fertilizers were scrapped. This meant that production cost increased as
farmers absolved all the cost. Around the same time, due to politics of the day, trade
treaties like the. International Coffee Agreement were scrapped. Also, countries like
Vietnam and some part of Asia entered the market with massive production. This meant
that Kenya was hit by high production costs as well as a flooded coffee market at the
time.
Rono (2002) argues that SAPs not only failed to achieve their target, but led to high
income inequalities, inflation, unemployment, declining agricultural output and other
negative impacts which have lowered living standards, especially those relating to the
material resources in the family. Furthermore, SAPs in Kenya have been linked to
12
increased deviant and crime rates, ethnic hatred and discrimination as well as welfare
problems, especially in the areas of education and health. Making a similar case on the
negative impact of SAPs in Kenya, Kiriti and Mariara (2002) argue that the policies
failed to create the conditions necessary for sustainable recovery in the country.
Consequently, poverty increased, and social indicators like life expectancy, child
mortality and primary school enrolment showed negative trends in the adjustment
period.
The above studies on coffee production are important because not only do they point
out that SAPs negatively affected the agricultural sector but they also show how this
also negatively impacted on Kenyans socially. They were therefore important to this
study as they point out in what ways SAPs affected the sector. However, since none had
been done on Gikondi location, the study contributed to a context specific analysis of
the impact in the area since it is widely recognized that there were unique and context
specific nuances in different coffee growing areas that arose out of the generalized
challenges of the sector. These unique responses whether in production, marketing or
introducing alternatives were some of the coping survival mechanisms that this study
interrogated and subsequently made recommendations for their enhancement (Kiriti &
Mariara,2002).
Over the years, there have been many reforms in the industry aimed at both easing the
production cost and fetching better prices for the farmers. These reforms included the
government removal of Kenya Planters Co-operative Union (KPCU) monopoly and
licensing of private millers. In the Kibaki regime, debts to the tune of six billion owed
to the Kenya Farmers Association (KF A) were cancelled. This was meant to induce
farmers to better production as the debt weighed heavily on them. The Coffee Act
13
(2002) was put in place to allow for a coffee development fund accessible to farmers in
form of soft loans. Closely tied to that, there were talks of how farmers could have a
guaranteed minimum returns per kilo of the cherry delivered. However, due to the
complexities of marketing and production, this initiative never· saw the light of day.
These reforms are just a few of the many that have been proposed, while some are still
operational and beneficial to the farmers, majority of good policies lack political
goodwill from the government or are frustrated by powerful cartels who benefit from
the status qou,(Mbataru, 2013).
2.3.2. Marketing of Coffee.
The last few decades have seen coffee pnces expenence pnce volatility due to a
convergence of reasons mainly being market liberalization, globalization, end of trade
treaties like the International Coffee Agreement (lCA), Climatic and weather changes
as well as a shift in market dynamics brought about by cartels formed by coffee roasters
and other market stakeholders (Pirotte, Pleyers & Poncelet, 2006). This price volatility
is mostly felt among peasant farmers who form the bulk of coffee producers and are
mostly found in Central America, Africa and Asia. Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania are
East African countries where coffee fetches a substantial amount of foreign exchange,
share similar policies on coffee and were affected and responded to coffee crisis in the
early 90's in almost similar ways which included diversification of alternative cash
crops, reduction in production volume and policy reforms in the sector, (ibid).
In Kenya, small-scale farmers contribute about 65-70 % of total coffee produced, while
plantations contribute about 25%. Apart from marketing, plantations largely operate
outside the Coffee Act mostly to their advantage. Small-scale farmers are by law
14
required to belong to a co-operative society, marketing institutions, which supervises
production process and market the produce. The impact, reaction and eventual
readjustment of the big planters after the crisis were noted to be different from small
scale growers. While big producers like Sasini diversified vertically by branding their
coffee and growing coffee variants like Ruiru Ilwhich require less inputs and
chemicals, most small scale farmers became increasingly frustrated as they could no
longer meet the cost of production (Mugarnbi, 2006).
Co-operative societies are the major channel that markets coffee from small scale
farmers in Kenya. The co-operative movement IS governed and controlled by the
government and for a long time, it has been the only channel through which small-scale
farmers could market their produce. While the cooperative movement is the bedrock of
small scale coffee farmers in Kenya, it is also an arena of challenges that impede the
development of the coffee sector in the country. According to Institute of Economic
Affairs (lCA, 2000), the cooperative societies in Kenya face a number of challenges
ranging from unprofessional management, political interference and exposure to
uncontrollable external shocks including low and unpredictable coffee prices. As a
result, many members have become disillusioned with their management with a number
of farmers opting to hawk coffee or all together abandon its growing. To restore faith in
the sector, the societies should serve farmers with credit, inputs, training and funds for
coffee rehabilitation. Additionally, they should be democratically and professionally
run.
International Coffee Organization (ICO, 2010) notes that coffee market often displays
price volatility which is deeply felt by the suppliers or the producers but the same is not
conveyed to the consumer as their prices remain relatively the same. ICO further notes
15
that between years 1990 and 2008, due to over production, coffee bean prices on the
future market fell by 57 percent while retail prices in the same period dropped only by
10%. The reason behind this is noted as a marketing strategy devised by roasters and
other middlemen to cushion retailers from constant price volatility and also enhance the
said cartels to maximize optimally from any over-production experienced. While
growers are languishing in poverty, roasters and international coffee industries dealing
in canned coffee are reaping record profits as they take advantage of the low prices and
technology. According to Rice (2003), modern manufacturing technology has now
allowed the roasters to substitute' Arabica' a premium quality blend with' Robusta' a
blend known to be of lower quality and attain the same premium taste. This leaves them
enjoying abnormally high profits at the expense of the producer.
2.3.3 Coffee's Competition.
Due to the continued disappointment of coffee farming, farmers in Nyeri County and
the wider central region have diversified production to crops and activities that were
previously used for subsistence consumption. In some parts of Mew County, which
neighbors Nyeri County, coffee bushes were cleared and used to burn charcoal. While
this was not common in many parts of Kenya and can be termed as extreme, cases of
coffee bushes being used to tether livestock are common. In 'Nyeri County, after
coffee's performance went down, farmers from areas that tea could grow immediately
switched to growing tea. However, their relief was short lived as the tea industry was
soon in crisis of its own. Dairy farming is one of the biggest and most promising
competitor to coffee farming as almost the whole of Nyeri County is conducive for
dairy farming. Furthermore, farmers can access continuous and timely payments as well
as credit facilities from the diary organizations Mbataru (2013).
16
Closely tied to' dairy farming, is poultry farming, farmers in Nyeri and especially
Mukurweini division have switched to poultry rearing for commercial purposes.
Horticulture farming has also become popular in the region due to a conducive climate
and soils and a ready market. Genetically modified green bananas have also been
introduced in the county though farmers have not fully embraced their production due
to fears that they are not safe for consumption. Though these activities are currently
helping the fanners cope with the hard economic times, they have not been developed
to a scale where coffee growing had reached. Therefore, they have not been able to
cushion farmers from the negative impact of the fall of the coffee sector, especially in
Nyeri (Njuguna, 2012).
According to Mbataru (20l3), unless a new major crop is introduced in the area, efforts
in diversification will most likely be at individual level and based on quick diff-usion of
innovations. Since small-scale fanners lack the resources and marketing expertise to
navigate in new markets with alternative crops, diversification will be dominated by
established actors. As a result, small scale farmers will continue to languish in poverty
unless the coffee sector is revived and revamped.
2.4 Summary & Gaps in Literature Review
The studies in the reforms of coffee production are important because they provide
insights into responses to the challenges. However, this study interrogated how the
fanners of Gikondi Location specifically interacted with these reforms and what so far
have been their impacts on the farmers' livelihood strategies. Studies dealing with the
impact of coffee marketing on farmers are important because they highlight the
challenges emanating from cooperatives, price fluctuations in the international markets,
the negative role of coffee cartels as well as technology negatively impacting on price.
17
They however had not discussed these challenges from the farmers' perspective but
from a co-operative point of view, this study have discussed these marketing challenges
among others as experienced by the farmers from their perspective. The study has also
discussed how fanners have utilized their capitals and assets to cope with these
vulnerabilities and strengthen their livelihoods from coffee, a gap that has been
addressed by this study. Studies focusing on competition that the coffee industry is
facing in Nyeri make the point that while there is increasing diversification among
small scale farmers, the new sectors have not been able to restore them (farmers) to
where they were in the golden age of coffee. Therefore, people still recognize that
coffee still has a major role to play towards sustainable livelihoods and therefore the
need to rehabilitate the sector. This recognition made this study extremely relevant. A
challenge with the works on diversification and competition is that they do not
interrogate the linkages between them and the coffee sector as a way of supporting both
sectors, an issue this study interrogated.
18
2.5 Conceptual Framework
DFID Sustainable Livelihoods Framework (SLF)
I LIVEliHOOD ASSETS I TRANSFORMING I LIVELIHOOD
STRUCTURES & n OUTCOMESVULNERABILIlY
/H q PBOCESSES 0CONTEXT r • Moro; Incomed.-- STRUCTURES " -Iocreased• SHOCKS SWN c------- LIVELIHOOD r well-beinq"-,,-____• : Influence: .levets of STRATEGIES• TRENDS 1& access: r • R~dllced, ... _ ....... - •... g<:M11'''OfK " vulnert,bllllY• SEASONALITY P - - F P ---• Pnvar;; <I • Imprav;;d food
• Cultuoe c secui icy
,~
;er.t~ h
-Tnsntuncos I • Mort. sustamablee us;;ofNR 00,,,"PROCESS[~ e
Source: DFlD, 1999,
Key
H = Human Capital
N = Natural Capital
F = Financial Capital
S = Social Capital
P = Physical Capital
Figure 1. Conceptual Framework
The SLF seeks to understand how people operate within a vulnerability contextthat is
shaped by different factors like shifting seasonal constraints and opportunities,
economic shocks and longer term trends, Within the context of vulnerability, people
draw on different types of livelihood capitals (assets) like social, human, natural,
financial or physical capital depending on what is at their disposal. The choice of the
livelihood capital is influenced by the vulnerability context, a range of institutions and
19
processes and how they use their asset base to develop a range of livelihood strategies
to achieve desired livelihood outcomes (De Stage et aI, 2002).
The utility of the SLF to this study was in its recognition of the vulnerabilities suffered
by poor people like the farmers of Gikondi. These vulnerabilities include stresses like
drought, poor pricing policies and fluctuating markets. Within this vulnerability
context, the farmers rely on a range of assets like skills, knowledge, health for
productive labor, access to credit and financial resources, arable land, physical
infrastrncture and production equipment which are accessible to the farmers to varying
degrees. Of the many capitals the frame work identifies, it recognizes that social capital
can assist smallholder farmers to access and strengthen all the other capitals. A
livelihood, the framework concludes, is strengthened when it can cope with and recover
from stresses and shocks while maintaining and enhancing its assets and capabilities.
As a livelihood, the study through this framework interrogated how the coffee farmers
in the face of the vulnerabilities of coffee prices fluctuations, unfavorable weather,
rising production cost which threatened production, and other challenges had drawn 011
the different assets at their disposal to recover and cope with these stresses. The study
especially interrogated how the farmers had employed or not employed social capital to
collectively address their challenges in a bid to strengthen and enhance their livelihoods
as further discussed above.
20
CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.1 Introduction
The chapter addressed the research methodology. The research design, determination of
the target population and the sample size, data instruments that were used and the data
analysis methodologies were discussed herein.
3.2 Research Design
The study employed a descriptive research design which was ideal for a case study as it
allowed the researcher several angles to the information, as well as focus on discovering
and understanding the experiences, perspectives and thoughts of people concerned.
Critical cases study in this case was used to make a logical generalization with regard
to farmers, management's and other stakeholder's perspectives of challenges facing
coffee sector post the demise of the giant co-operative societies.
3.3 Site of study
The research was conducted in the five sub-locations of Gikonc1i location, Nyeri
County. The five sub-locations are Thimu, Karaba, Kiirungi, Karindi and Muthuthiini.
The location has a total population of 18,533 people (Kenya National Bureau of
Statistics, 2010). It is located in the periphery of Nyeri County, bordering Murang'a
County. The road infrastructure is poor compared to other parts of the county with no
major roads passing through the location. It is however a fertile area with deep red
volcanic soils and adequate rainfall that can support the growing of diversified crops.
21
The major livelihood source is agriculture; (coffee and food crops growing) and dairy
farming.
3.4 Target Population
The population of a study can be defined as a complete set of individuals, cases or
objects with some common observable characteristic (Mugenda & Mugenda 2003).
While the primary targets of the research were farmers in the location, the study zeroed
down and sampled those who had at least two acres of land under coffee cultivation.
This is because these were the farmers who were more likely to invest substantially in
coffee growing, thus taking a keen interest in the crop as a source of livelihood. These
farmers number about 900 hundred in the location.
Sub-location Frequency %
Thimu 180 20
Muthuthi-ini 180 20
Karindi 180 20
Kiirungi 180 20
Karaba 180 20
Total 900 100
Table l.Target Population Table.
22
3.5 Sample Size
Sub-location Frequency Sample ratio sample size
Thimu 180 0.1 18
Muthuthi-ini 180 0.1 18
Karindi 180 0.1 18
Kiirungi 180 0.1 18
karaba 180 0.1 18
Total 900 90
Table 2. Sample Size Table
A sample consists of a small number of population collected from the target population.
The sample chosen has to be accessible and must be large enough to represenr the
characteristics. A representative sample size is scientifically taken to be at least 10 per
cent of the population (Mugenda and Mugenda, 2003). Therefore, the sample size for
the study was 10 per cent of the 900 farmers with at least two acres of land under
coffee. The sample size of 90 was distributed equally among the five sub-locations.
Therefore, there were 18 respondent farmers per sub-location. These were identified
using purposive and snowball sampling
23
3.6 Research Instruments
The study employed guided questionnaires with a mix of both open and closed ended
questions. They were orally administered by a group of research assistants who had
been trained on data collection and under the supervision of the researcher. While
closed ended questions would be important for reliability of the questions across
different respondents, open ended questions will seek to probe further various issues in
the questionnaire.
3.7 Data Collection procedures and methods
With regards to the procedure for data collection, the principle researcher obtained an
authorization letter from Kenyatta University registrar's office allowing research to be
conducted in the designated area of research. This letter was presented to the area chief
who in turn informed the sub-chiefs of the sub-locations of the interviews undertaking
as well as intentions and modalities of the research. Once proper introductions to the
authorities had been made and permission to conduct the research had been granted,
data collection commenced. However, in the period before research commences, an
exercise to identify and train research assistants who were to help out during the
research was carried out.
Primary data formed the backbone of this research. As explained elsewhere, it was
collected from 18 farmers in each of the five sub-locations who had been identified as
having at least two acres of land under coffee cultivation. Once identified, the
respondents were approached by the interviewer who introduced themselves and the
research, and assured them of confidentiality should they chose to take part in the
24
research. Once he/she had consented, the interview proceeded in a relatively private
place. The interview took no more than one hour.
Secondary data which complemented the primary data was derived from sources like
books, journals, both print and electronic, monographs, newspapers and publications
from scholars in this field. These materials were obtained from Kenyatta University's
Post Modern library.
3.8 Data Analysis
Data from collected from the field was organized and compared with data from other
sources in the same field to check on consistency and reliability and finally analyzed in
to charts and graphs. Further, data collected was subjected to content analysis to
establish major and common themes and issues emerging. Some of the major categories
included challenges facing farmers during coffee production, marketing and issues of
competition of the sector from other livelihood sources. Once the categories and themes
had been established from the data, the organized data was then subjected to data
triangulation, then descriptive and interpretive analysis and then writing of the project
commenced.
25
CHAPTER FOUR: DATA ANALYSIS AND PRESENTATION
4.1 Inrroduction
This chapter represents data collected and analyzed for the study. The data collection
and analysis is aligned to the study objectives and falls within the broad categorizations
of coffee production, marketing and its competition from alternative livelihoods in the
study area. The analysis is guided by the Social Capital Theory and Sustainable
Livelihood framework.
4.2 Response Rate
Mugenda and Mugenda (2003) argue that a response rate of 65% is good enough and
the results are validated. This position is also supported by Holbrook, Krosnick & Pfent
(2007) who observe that a survey whose response rate is lower than 50% cannot be
considered accurate. The sample size of this study was 90 respondents who were fairly
equally distributed among the five sub-locations of Gikondi location. A response rate of
100% was achieved in this study as purposive and snowballing sampling methods were
used and farmers were willing to offer information upon being approached
4.3 Characteristics of Respondents
4.3.1 Respondents' Gender
Out of the 90 farmers - all registered as shareholders with the local marketing
institutions - who were our respondents, 72 were men (80%) while only 18 were
women (20%). These findings support the popular notion that while women and
children provide the bulk of agricultural labor, men are still the owners of the means of
26
production, in hIding land, and, therefor , larg Iy control how th )11"0 ds from off e
are utilized.
Table 3: Respondents Gender
Sex Frequency Percentage
Female 18 20
Male 72 80
Total 90 100
Source: Research Data (2014)
4.3. 2. Respondents Age
The study's respondents were mainly between 46-60 years of age represented by 39%
as illustrated in the diagram below. These findings are consistent with earlier findings
(Chege, 20 10) asserting that coffee fanners are generally ageing as the youth have
shunned the practice and mostly either moved to urban areas in search of better
prospects and opportunities or taken to other income generating practices in the rural
areas and which -are acting as livelihood competitors to coffee growing.
27
Below 30 yrs
6%
Figure 2 Age of Respondents
Source: Researcb Data (2014)
4.3.3 Respondents' Marital Status
The pie chart below shows the marital status of the respondents. 72% percent of the
people interviewed were married, 20% were widowed while 8% were single and mostly
women who were above 45 years of age.
28
Figure 2: Marital Status
Source: Research Data (2014)
4.3.4 Respondents' Family Size
The figure below illustrates family sizes of the respondents. As illustrated, majority of
families (51%) had 3 to 5 children. Families with less than five children were 49 %
which who belonged mostly to young farmers below 45 years of age. This is a common
phenomenon observed throughout the country where families with parents under 45
years are much smaller compared to their counterparts of over 60 years (Nyachomba,
2012).
lor 2 Children
15%
Figure 3: Respondents' Family Size
Source: Research Data (2014)
29
4.3.5. Respondents' Education Levels
As illustrated in the diagram below, 61% of the respondents had attained post primary
education with 11% of them having a university degree. 17% of the respondents had
received college training in different careers, especially teaching. Among the sampled
population, there were no cases of illiterate farmers. All had basic literacy skills, having
at least primary school level education.
University
11%
Figure 4: Respondents' Education Level
Source: Research Data (2014)
4.3.6. Duration of Coffee Farming in Years
The study found out that 53% of the respondents have been farming coffee for more
than 20 years as illustrated in the diagram below. Only 7% of respondents, most of who
30
were below age of 30 years, indicated that they had been in the business for less than 5
years. This is illustrated in the figure below.
Less than 5
Figure 5: Experience in Coffee Farming.
Source: Research Data (2014)
4.4. Challenges Experienced by Coffee Farmers
Challenges experienced by coffee farmers are discussed here below and guided by the
study objectives. They have been categorized into production and marketing challenges
as well as those emanating from competition from other livelihood alternatives to
coffee.
4.4.1. Challenges Experienced During Coffee Production
The study sought to establish the major challenges faced by coffee farmers during
coffee production. Farmer cited a number of these challenges which were both internal;
emanating from their own environment as well as external, attributable to issues that
31
were beyond their control. Some of these challenges included land fragmentation
(13%), low soil productivity (14%), high cost of farm inputs and lack of credit facilities
(28%), expensive labor (8%) especially during coffee picking period and climate related
challenges (15%). The figure below shows the rankings of these challenges as ranked
by farmers.
Production Challenges
,/- 1
1",
12
1
20
l7 / /
Expensive labor
low Soil productivity
land Fragmentation
Enviromental Challenges
Poor Coffee Variety
High Cost of production
• Frequency
25
o 5 10 15 20 25
Figure 6 Challenges related to coffee production
Source: Research Data (2014)
With regard to the high cost of inputs, farmers (28%) felt that with liberalization and the
cessation of subsidies, most inputs like fertilizers and pesticides kept skyrocketing and
were out of reach for most farmers. As a result, they were forced to either do without
them or improvise cheaper alternatives. One farmer narrated to the researcher how he
mixed a variety of wild plants and fermented them for a couple of days to be used as
pesticide. In place of fertilizer, farmers relied completely on compost and farmyard
manure instead of using all three combined as before. The net effect was poor yields, in
32
both quantity and quality, leading to reduced income in the already troubled coffee
sector. This in turn produces a vicious cycle as there are credit facilities for fertilizer
and pesticides which are sometimes extended to farmers by the marketing cooperatives
but based on the output of the previous crop. Low yields have, therefore, meant that
farmers cannot access these credit facilities, even if they wanted to.
Complicating the problem of high cost of inputs is land fragmentation. In Nyeri, the
average land acreage was 1.5 ha in 2008 and continued to be subdivided by the day
(Mbataru, 2008). Further, the population density of the County is 208 persons per Km2
compared to the national average of 78 persons per Km2 (World Bank, 20 II). This
means that the area is highly densely populated. The high rate of land fragmentation has
forced farmers to shift to other crops and activities that require less land like poultry
and rabbit keeping as opposed to growing coffee.
Even with reduced land available for coffee farming, coffee farmers (22%) have not
sufficiently embraced high yielding varieties that can be grown on smaller pieces of
land but produce higher yields. Farmers in Gikondi continue to plant the traditional
varieties of Scot Laboratory (SL) 28 and SL 34 which were introduced before
independence (Mureithi, 2008). These varieties are not particularly high yielding and
require a lot of land. Furthermore, they are not resistant to coffee berry disease, leaf
rust, mealy bug and other pests and diseases. These varieties are also not dtought
resistant and whenever there is prolonged drought, the yields are very poor and some
plants dry up from the roots. While a relatively new breed, Ruiru 11, was introduced in
Gikondi in the late 1980s, farmers have not fully embraced the variety. The farmers
interviewed observed that while the breed was resistant to coffee berry disease and leaf
rust, it was inferior to both SL 28 and SL 34 resulting in lower prices in the coffee
33
market. Furthermore, its cherries are not as heavy as those of the other two varieties and
weigh less compared to a similar amount of the latter. Ruiru II· is also vulnerable to
drought and dries up much faster than the other two varieties. As a result, most farmers
were reluctant to plant this improved variety.
High cost of labor is another challenge facing coffee growing in Gikondi (8%). Coffee
is a labor intensive crop, especially around the harvesting season between October and
December. Due to rural urban migration especially among the youth, excessive alcohol
intake by men and the low birth rates in the area, labor has become scarce and,
therefore, very expensive. The average wages paid to a laborer per half day; 8.00-1.00
PM is Ksh250. During the peak harvesting period, coffee can be picked as many as
three days in a week with the number of laborers depending on how much coffee is
ripe. These dynamics have made picking coffee a very expensive exercise. As a result,
farmers who do not have family labor may prefer to let the red cherries dry up on the
trees and sell them as inferior mbuni variety. As Mr. Kinyua, an old coffee farmer who
has been in the business for more than 20 years observed;
"Tending many coffee bushes is proving 10 be a challenge as labor is 110 longer
forthcoming. The young generation only wants to live ill cities and want nothing
to do with hard manual labor and the ones left behind are too lazy 10 work and
all they do is drown ill alcohol all day long We are already old and manual
labor is beyond us nOIll". (OJ Mr. Kinyua Nduati, 1t" September 2014)
Changing and shifting Climatic and weather patterns have also had an adverse effect on
coffee growing (15%). In recent years, it has become increasingly difficult to forecast
weather patterns. Sometimes, short rains that facilitate the flowering season in February
34
are either late or absent altogether rnearung that coffee does not flower properly.
Sometimes, the cold season and rains may extend up to 'September leading to cherries
being affected by blight. Also, the increasingly cold season around July/August in
recent years has created a ripe environment for pests and diseases to thrive. Against a
background of inability to afford pesticides, unfavorable weather patterns have colluded
with pest and disease challenges to further downgrade coffee yields.
Other challenges cited by the farmers included poor grasp of current coffee production
processes, lack of advice from agricultural extension officers and inability of farmers to
take and act on advice concerning production.
4.4.2. Marketing Challenges
The Coffee sector in Kenya is characterized by a co-operative system of production,
processing, milling, marketing and auction. These cooperatives federate small holders'
produce nearly 70 per cent of Kenyan coffee (European Commission, 2013). Coffee
produce from small-scale farmers by law has always been marketed through co-
operative societies. These laws have existed from independence until recently when the
Coffee Act 2002 was introduced. While this has been the practice in Kenya, farmers
generally and specifically in Gikondi, have expressed their displeasure at the way
cooperatives are managed. This suspicion has been confirmed as 44% of the
respondents quoted displeasure with the leadership of coffee marketing channels which
by law are co-operative societies.
Asked about the challenges they faced in coffee marketing, farmers generally grouped
their challenges into four broad categories being leadership, financial management,
35
political interference, coffee hawking and theft related challenges. The following figure
shows how fanners weighted these challenges.
leadership
.Series1
Coffee Hawking & Theft
Politicallnterfearance
Financial Management
o 10 20 30 40
Figure 7. Challenges related to coffee marketing
Source: Research Data (2014)
Leadership was rated highest at 44% by fanners who complained that their leaders
lacked transparency and accountability with regards to handling of coffee. They also
complained that the leaders were corrupt and hardly listened to the views of the fanners
in management. Often times, these leaders, especially the Chairperson would rig
himself into office ifhe was an incumbent or would collude with political leadership in
the area or a section of the fanners to be installed into the office. Asked why fanners
colluded with inept leadership, one fanner named Wangai who has been fanning coffee
for about ten years confessed the benefits he gets from the collusion:
36
"Office holders ask LIS to mobilize people 10 vote and pass particular agenda
during farmers meetings and in return we get free farm inputs and sometimes
cash depending all what they are offering." (OJ Mr. Waugai Gaitho, 191h
September 2014)
Once in office, he does the bidding of his 'political godfathers' or the few influential
farmers that installed him in office. As a result, farmers had become disillusioned with
the regular cooperative elections and many boycotted them.
According to Wangai, the leaders then often colluded with unscrupulous coffee millers
and marketers to fleece farmers off their coffee proceeds. Fa1111erssaid leaders would
also market the produce through their preferred millers even if they did not offer
competitive prices because they suspected the leaders were given bribes in form of cash
and farm inputs. Other times, the leaders at the factory level would conspire to steal
money through .bloated overheads and sitting allowances. In the 2012/2013 budget,
farmers observed that the management of Ruthaka Cooperative Society, the local
marketing channel and co-operative, had allocated themselves Ksh20 million as sitting
allowance, an excessive amount given that coffee payments were very low during that
period with a kilo going for as low as KshlO.
Another leadership related challenge as noted by respondents was lack of information
and exposure to make informed decisions among management. While the law clearly
stipulates that elected leadership, more so those holding crucial positions must be
sufficiently literate, most fanners complained that a majority of the leadership had very
basic education, most of them primary school drop outs. They were, therefore, not in a
position to understand and engage with the complex processes and procedures that
entail coffee marketing. As a result, millers and dealers would often take advantage of
37
the illiteracy and lower the grade of the coffee which would then fetch a lower price.
Furthermore, the leadership was not also in a position to identify and disseminate
relevant information with regards to coffee marketing dynamics due to their lack of
education related skills.
Closely related to leadership challenges was poor financial management skills as rated
by 28% of farmers interviewed. Respondents complained about the lack of capacity to
manage finances of the leaders, both elected and employed. As a result, there was a lot
of pillage and misuse of farmers' money and miscalculation of the actual amount of
produce. One farmer complained of how the manual counting system used to collate
kilos in readiness for payments had regularly miscounted her kilos. Sometimes, the
kilos would be undercounted at which times she would go to management to complain.
At other times, they would be over counted by as much as 500 kilos. During such times,
she would pocket the extra money and not say a word. In 2008 in one of the factories,
after a serious dispute with farmers over the collating of their kilos, the factory office
bumed down in mysterious circumstances. Farmers blamed the management although
these allegations were never proved. More recently in 2012, farmers were never paid
even after delivering their produce to the factory (Waitathu, 2014). The reason given by
management was that the coffee fetched very low prices and all the money went to
clearing the factories' overheads and the debts the farmers had accumulated. Farmers,
however, pointed accusing fingers at management saying the coffee was bought at
normal prices but there was a lot of factory mismanagement, thus the lack of payment.
Farmers also complained about political interference (17%) in the coffee sector, more
so at the factory and cooperative society's levels by local political leadership. As the
leading source of income in the area for most people, politicians often interfered with
38
its management as a way of gaining relevance and popularity among the farmers. As a
result, farmers and the management would often be split into rival camps supporting
different politicians. The most recent case that farmers cited was the taking over of
coffee marketing by the Nyeri County Governor, Nderitu Gachagua in February 2014
without any legal framework for engagement (Waitathu, 2014). Farmers complained
that the Governor working with society management and without their knowledge or
consent had taken over coffee marketing and delayed the payment of the 2013 crop in
2014. Ordinarily, fa1111erSwould be paid by April. Under the new arrangement however,
farmers were only paid in September after a bitter struggle. To his credit however, the
farmers said that they had received a record payment of over 60 shillings per kilo, a fete
that had not been witnessed in the area.
Coffee hawking and theft was rated by 11 % as a major challenge faced by coffee
farmers in Gikindi location. People would hawk cherries to other farmers or buyers
originating from outside the area, even if it was illegal. Further, the problem with
hawking is that farmers often ended up getting lower prices than even what they get
from the cooperatives. Asked why some farmers did it, an old man who have been
farming coffee for 20 years confessed to doing it often said that;
"Though hawking coffee is prohibited, it's beneficial to us as YOII can access
instant cash and offset temporary challenges as compared 10 the moneyfrom the
cooperatives that lakes forever to get 10 the farmers ".( I 0. Mr. Gacliangi
Mllchino.20rd September 2014)
Closely related to coffee hawking has been theft of coffee while drying at the factories.
This has become so common that these incidents are reported on a weekly basis. Prime
suspects are thought to be individuals who operate private coffee factories as they look
39
for the right volume to break even and make profits. Lack of awareness of farmers
rights and what they are entitled to from their coffee production is also a major
challenge hampering marketing. Farmers do not know that they should be consulted
with regards to how their coffee is marketed. As a result, they have often remained
powerless and helpless when facing management. Asked why they cannot engage, most
farmers cited their lack of information about coffee marketing, the fact that most
educated persons have left the village and do not take interest in coffee affairs, and also
lack of an effective to system to organize farmers to petition for their rights collectively.
4.4.3. Coffee's Competition from Alternative livelihood Sources
During the golden era of coffee growing in the 1970s to mid 1980s when coffee income
accounted for 40% of Kenya's foreign exchange earnings, widespread commercial
production of alternative crops was largely non-existent (Mbataru, 2013). Indeed even
the production of food crops was threatened, with fanners opting to put much of their
land under coffee and then buy food from other places in Kenya, more so the Rift
Valley. However, after the coffee crisis beginning the mid 1980s, real opportunities for
horizontal diversification set in form of food and cash crops that would be grown for
income. Farmers also began engaging in other agricultural activities like dairy farming
and poultry keeping, which became a threat to coffee growing. In Gikondi area like
other parts of Nyeri County, the smaller the land, the more farmers diversi.fied to
maximize on the small acreages and spread the risks. As a result, coffee has been facing
more competition from other livelihood sources in the last decade alone than in the
entire history of coffee farming in Gikondi location in the wider Nyeri County. This
stems from a combination of both the failure of coffee industry and the introduction of
livelihood alternatives that are more appealing to the farmers. Land, capital, water and
40
access to markets among others were highlighted as the important factors in the efforts
to forge new strategies and alternatives to coffee in diversification.
The figure below shows some of the crops and activities farmers have undertaken as
part of diversification.
Others
.Series1
Fruit Farming
Poultry
Horticulture
Dairy Farming
o 10 20 30 40
Figure 8 Livelihood alternatives adopted by farmers in Gikondi Location
Source: Research Data (2014)
Daily farming rated by 44% of respondents is by far the most embraced alternative to
coffee farming in Gikondi location and the wider Mukurwe-ini sub County. Daily
farming, however, is not entirely a new activity as it has always been practiced but
considered for household consumption and hardly for commercial purposes. In the
same light, daily farming was considered as a 'women affair' which only played a
support role to the male dominated coffee farming. With the collapse of coffee
economy however, daily farming has now taken the centre stage and has become the
economic backbone of farmers in Gikondi and the wider Mukurwe-ini sub County. On
41
average, the study found that there are two grade cows per household which supply
milk for both consumption and commercial purposes. Again on average, each house
spares about 3-4 litres per day for sale. A litre of milk goes for about Ksh40, per day,
amounting to about Ksh 160 and KsM,800.00 per month and around Ksh57,600.00 per
year. This may appear modest, but it is three to four times what farmers realize from
coffee on a good year save, for years like 2012 where coffee farmers went without pay.
This cash goes to pay school fee and to cater for other family needs. Another important
benefit is that farmers can access loan facil ities in both cash and dairy feeds based on
litres of milk delivered to Wakulima Dairy Society, a dairy co-operative society where
farmers in Gikondi sell their mille. Again, the access to credit facilities works Cor
farmers as they are able to cater for their needs even without cash at hand, something
that coffee farming no longer offers.
Climatic and weather conditions in Gikondi Location and the wider Nyeri County has
always been favorable for horticulture (22%) which ranges from sukumawiki (kales),
tomatoes, cabbages and capsicum, among others. However, horticulture farming was
never taken seriously until the collapse of coffee economy and its currently number two
after dairy farming in terms of alternatives to coffee farming. The most attractive trait
about these crops is that they take no more than three months to mature and harvest and
that the market is ready as the target is both the local community and nearby towns.
The most preferred is tomato and sukiunawiki farming. A farmer notes that with quarter
an acre of land under tomatoes, you can earn a minimum of Ksh 150,000.00 after three
months. However, he notes that tomato farming is both capital and labour intensive as
well as very susceptible to weather changes. Sukumawiki, on the other hand, is less
lucrative and it's not as demanding as tomatoes. While most farmers grow kales for
42
their household consumption, it is however noted they would be a rewarding venture if
grown for commercial purposes.
Compared to coffee, horticulture is more favorable as the weather is more conducive
compared to coffee farming. Besides, most horticulture crops are mature and ready for
harvest within three months of planting, giving them a comparative edge over coffee
which takes at least two years to flower and a year or more before harvesting begins.
Market for horticulture products is usually ready and easily accessible within the
County. More attractive is that payment is mostly on the spot. This is a great contrast to
coffee as farmers - who are also not privy to price setting - wait for at least four to five
months after delivering the produce to factories for payment.
Poultry fanning (17%) was noted to have picked lip within the last five years as one
farmer, Njoki noted:
"NIy chama members and I decided to keep poultry for meat (broilers) because have
limited space we and also thai we could access loans from the bank. We now supply
chicken to Mukurwe-ini 1011'11hotels, and even ill Nyeri lawn. "( OJ Ms Njoki Waigera,
zo" September 2014)
Poultry farming, for both meat and eggs, rated at third place by 17% of respondents, has
picked up, especially among young and educated farmers because it is sensitive and
needs a keen and dedicated eye. 'Because of its high risk investment and susceptibility
to diseases, it requires a farmer who is versatile' in nature and one who has access to
information, mostly [rom the internet as well as other sources, making the younger
generation more suitable for it. Poultry farming is perhaps the most lucrative business in
Gikondi location currently but also the riskiest so far. However, this alternative is not
43
popular with the old generation for reasons discussed earlier. Again, comparing poultry
farming to coffee farming, the former is favored over the latter as it has near instant
proceeds as it takes about four months for chicks to mature and be ready for market
unlike coffee which require about three years. Another advantage of poultry farming
over coffee is that poultry farming occupies a very small pal1 of land hence more
economical as compared to coffee which occupies quite a chunk of land.
Fruit farming (11 %) which is mostly passion fruit and avocado is also slowly being
embraced as an alternative income generating activity. But the older generation, who
form the bulk of fanners in Gikondi location, are predictably slow to shift from age-old
mentalities and view things from a different perspective. However, a few young farmers
like Gituku (who specializes with passion fruits) are quick to embrace and tryout new
ideas, says fruit farming is rewarding especially if the target Market is Nairobi. Giruku
notes that a sack of passion fruit fetches around Ksh6,500.00 (which he describes as a
very good price) at Marikiti Market in Nairobi. Mr. Gituku grows passion fruits for
commercial services together with his sel f help group members who are mainly farmers
mainly under 45 years of age who favour fruit farming over coffee farming, mostly
because they are able to select markets and influence the prices they receive for their
products. Not surprisingly, Gituku notes that if coffee does not improve in the near
future, he will uproot the few bushes of coffee he has in favor of passion fruits.
Commercial avocado farming is also taking toot in the area although previously,
farmers did not have much regard for it as one farmer, Mr. Karithia explained:
Commercial avocado farming is picking lip thougb slowly as the young farmers
among us are open to its farming. Personally 1don 't care much for its
commercial value as the crop is dormant for most port of the year and cannot
44
really sustain me, however, J have a few trees that cater for my household
consumption. (0.1. Mr. Karithia Ngare, 26th September 20/4)
The study, however, noted that young generation fanners are the ones taking up
commercial avocado farming unlike the older generation who refer to avocado as
Maguna Ngui, a derogatory term meaning 'food for dogs'. Unfortunately, avocado is a
seasonal fruit that peaks between July - September and remains dormant for the most
part of the year. This long passive period could have influenced farmers to shun the
crop.
Other activities include fish farming which although new in the area is proving to be
quite popular among young farmers. However, by the time this study was being
conducted, the establishment of fish ponds was still in progress and so no statistics were
available to indicate how it compares in terms of returns to other farming ventures.
45
CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSION &
RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1lntroductioll
In this chapter, summary of findings, conclusion and recommendations have been
derived from the study carried out on challenges faced by coffee farmers in Gikondi
Location. The summary, conclusion and recommendations will be informed by both
Social Capital Theory and Sustainable Livelihood Strategy Framework, which the
research is based on.
5.2 Summary of findings
5.2.1 Production
The foregoing research has established that the coffee sector though facing senous
challenges in Gikondi is an important economic activity in the area in terms of income
generation and employment creation. Further, the study has established that over the
years, the impact of coffee has been felt in all spheres of life in the area. There have
been backward linkages with farm input suppliers, forward linkages with the transport
sector, savings and credit institutions as well as through consumption of goods and
services like education, health and other social services. Even politically, coffee has
impacted the political environment, first through elections and other political activities
at the factory and society level, and then at the level of local politics iike parliament and
local authorities. These linkages have been created in spite of the various challenges
that the sector has faced.
46
In production, farmers indentified challenges like lack of farm inputs and credit
facilities which was rated highest by farmers at 28%, poor coffee varieties was rated
second by 22% of the respondents while poor climatic and weather conditions came in
third at 15%. Land fragmentation (14%) and low soil productivity (13%) came in next
at a close tie. Poor environmental factors like lack of manpower, especially during peak
harvesting periods, among others, was rated last at 8%. The livelihood structural frame
advocates for farmers to make use of different types of capital assets to mitigate the
above mentioned vulnerabilities and short comings. These could be making use of
human capital asset of family and relatives for labor during coffee peak periods as well
as throughout the year.
5.2.2 Marketing
In marketing of the coffee produce, the vulnerabilities and challenges cited by farmers
included leadership which was ranked the highest at 44%. Financial management came
in second at 28%, while political interference and coffee hawking and theft were rated
at 17% and II % respectively.
Social Capital is formed and strengthened when different key players in the society
coming together and form social networks informed by n0l111Sthat work for the better
of everyone in the society. With regard to marketing their produce, farmers and the
society at large in Gikondi need to. come together and form social network ties that will
enable them look out for each other and avoid being exploited by a small group as is the
current norm by marketing institutions.
47
5.2.3 Alternatives to Coffee
To cope with the collapsed coffee economy in Gikondi location, farmers have
developed mechanisms of exploiting alternative livelihoods to cater for their needs.
These alternatives include dairy farming which was rated highest at 44%, horticulture
farming was rated second at 22%, poultry farming came in next at 17%, fruit farming
came in second last 11% while other activities like fish farming among others came in
last at 6%. As the sustainable livelihood framework indicates, farmers have taken
different capital assets to absorb the shocks presented by the collapse of the coffee
economy. Farmers have utilized the natural and physical capital assets at their disposals
like good climatic conditions, rivers and roads to grow other crops like horticulture,
poultry and fruit farming and access markets through the roads both within and without
the county which helps them supplement their income.
5.3 Conclusion
The challenges and constraints faced by coffee farmers in Gikondi are not very unique
and different from those faced by other farmers in Nyeri County. However, differences
are witnessed in the way these challenges play out, especially given that the area is at
the very periphery of the County and has not benefited from a developed a transport
network like other parts of Nyeri. The distance from Nyeri town (about SOkm) coupled
with poor roads also makes the area an insignificant source of food especially fruits and
vegetables and dairy for the Nyeri town market. This has some influence on the choice
of alternative livelihood sources to coffee.
48
5.3.1. Production
The study established that coffee fanners In Gikondi location face many and varied
vulnerabilities during coffee production. These vulnerabilities emanate both from
localized sources as well as international shocks. These stresses included unaffordable
farm inputs and lack of access to credit as pointed out by 28% of the fanners, poor
coffee varieties (22%), poor climatic conditions (15%), land fragmentation (13%) and
poor transport network especially during the rainy season (8%) among others.
As a result of these challenges, farmers have continued to realize low yields and profits
[Tom coffee growing, sometimes, going without pay in spite of them delivering coffee
to the factories. To mitigate the challenges they face, farmers try to maximize on the
various forms of capital at their disposal, however little, to be able to increase their
income from coffee and reduce their vulnerabilities.
Human capital is perhaps the most readily available. This is because farmers who on
average have family sizes of seven are able to access and utilize free labor from their
children especially on weekends. This is especially important during the harvesting
season as labor in the area is very expensive. Financial capital is a challenge in Gikondi
location as most coffee farmers cannot access bank credit due to the risky nature of the
coffee business. To mitigate this challenge, most farmers have come together to form
self help groups where they contribute and take small loans among other services they
receive as a collective from these groups. These groups are also an important source of
social capital as farmers come together, exchange information and generally, provide
informal support to each other that is very vital in creating resilience in the face of
income shocks and stresses.
49
The study also established that coffee farming has largely been left to the old people in
the village as 72% of respondents were above 45 years of age. Only 28% of the
respondents were below 45 years of age. The study further notes that among the 28% of
farmers below 45 years, only 6% of the farmers were below the age of 30 years. This
study reveals that young people have either left the village for greener pastures or opted
to engage in more lucrative activities like horticulture growing. While this may be
healthy for diversification, it means that the support farmers would get from the youth
who are generally more educated and knowledgeable is lacking.
Tn conclusion, while coffee may be finally picking up from years of poor prices, a lot
more needs to be done in te1l11Sof production in Gikondi for farmers to benefit from the
renewed coffee prices. Equally, proper structures and processes including laws and
policies must be put in place both by the county government and private sector to spur
production and address some of the current challenges.
5.3.2. Marketing
The study established that coffee marketing is one area where farmers felt very helpless
to influence and yet it had far reaching implications on the overall benefits farmers
derived from coffee production. Major challenges in marketing revolved around
leadership which farmers rated highest at about 44%, financial management was
second, ranking at 28%, political interference rated third with 17%, while coffee
hawking and theft came in last at about II %.
These challenges especially existed because coffee was only legally marketed through
cooperatives. Liberalization had not gone far enough to allow individual farmers to
market their own coffee through individual initiatives and channels, yet the government
50
had not been able to prevent mismanagement of coffee sales proceeds by the
cooperative societies. To mitigate the mismanagement at marketing level, farmers
therefore felt that it was important for government to license coffee pulping to small
scale farmers. This would increase competition and efficiency while removing the
monopoly exercised by cooperative societies.
While cooperatives had become a source of disincentives for coffee farmers (44%),
farmers felt that they potentially could be a source of strength if properly utilized.
According to the farmers, the coming together of individual farmers at the cooperative
level presented a unique source of social capital that would be used by farmers to
advance and negotiate for better management practices with the cooperative
management. However, this had not yet been realized as management routinely ignored
farmers and also used the tactics of divide and rule to further dis-empower fanners.
Further, vocal farmers could easily be bought off, even as the young and more educated
farmers and people in the area kept off coffee farming. Farmers felt that if they properly
organized and were sensitized on their rights and responsibilities in the marketing of
coffee, then they would be able to streamline coffee marketing and stem coffee losses at
that level.
Beyond the farmers themselves, the research established that there was need to improve
and enhance the managerial capacities of cooperative society management. While some
of the shortcomings at the management level were due to corruption, lack of requisite
capacities in financial management and leadership skills also contributed substantially
to the dismal performance of the Saccos. These inadequacies also made them
vulnerable to external interferences and thus, the case of local political operatives
constantly meddling in coffee affairs in Gikondi.
51
The research, therefore, established that there was a lot more room for improvement
with regards to how coffee was marketed. The improvements were especially needed in
the structures and processes involved in coffee marketing, including laws, policies and
institutional cultures in order to guarantee increased and sustainable incomes from
coffee as a source of livelihood.
5.3.3 Competition from alternative livelihood sources
As has been observed elsewhere in this study, horizontal diversification is a recent
phenomenon in Gikondi and other coffee growing areas, picking up mainly in the last
two decades after the fall of coffee prices in the international market and the subsequent
prolonged crisis. During the golden era of coffee growing that stretched from the 1960s
to the mid 1980s, widespread commercial production of altemative crops was largely
non-existent. Indeed even the production of food crops was threatened with fanners
opting to put much of their land under coffee growing and then buying food form other
places in Kenya, more so the Rift Valley.
Beginning the mid 1980s, farmers begun to venture out into growing alternative crops
both as a source of income as well as food. This was necessitated by the fact that coffee
could no longer provide money to purchase food as before. The choice of altemative
activities for cash was premised on a number of factors; those crops that could ensure
higher returns on the ever din:inishing acreages, whose returns would be realized
immediately or within a relatively short time, were early maturing and also whose
markets were assured whether locally or internationally were the most favored. As a
result, farmers ventured into varied agricultural activities at different intensities. Dairy
farming has been recorded as the leading alternative venture ranking 44%, horticulture
52
farming was ranked second at 22%, poultry farming came in third at 17%, fruits
farming and other activities were ranked at 11% and 6% respectively.
Dairy farming was especially popular with a ready milk market in the nearby Mukurwe-
ini town as well as Nairobi, which is 2 hours away and where farmers could easily pack
and transport the milk using public transport and which would find its way into the
market as early as 6.00 am. Following the success of dairy farming, a number of
cooperatives emerged through which farmers would market their produce and which
would also give farmers access to credit and other farm inputs, in effect replacing the
services that used to be offered by coffee growing in its golden era. Initially, a number
of farmers, especially the young, uprooted coffee bushes to give way to planting of
napier grass for dairy farming as well as other activities. However, as coffee begun
showing signs of a return beginning 2013, farmers started intercropping napier grass
with coffee and also utilizing manure from cows to enrich coffee growing; in a sense,
establishing a symbiotic rather than competitive relationship between the two.
In general, diversification in the area has helped to somewhat restore people to a
standard of living close to what they enjoyed during the golden coffee era. As a result,
more chilclren are able to go to school and more people can afford healthcare, especially
among the younger generation. Like coffee, these have also created both backward and
forward linkages, further spurring the local economy. Credit facilities are now
available, local transport has been improved, infrastrucrural facilities like water and
electricity are now available and there is mushrooming of small and medium enterprises
that are supported by the diversified agricultural activities. Horizontal diversification of
agriculture has also helped rekindle social capital and its benefits in the area as a lot of
53
the alternative livelihood activities and strategies require people to come together and
act as a collective.
5.4. Recommendations
The recommendations given by the srudy are informed by the reality that while coffee is
an important cash crop for the people of Gikondi as is evidenced by their perseverance
even when the coffee crisis hit hard and a number of fanners elsewhere uprooted the
crop, it also faces a number of challenges including stiff competition from other
livelihood sources. Therefore, the recommendations aim at improving the income
generated from the crop as well as its relationship with other alternative livelihood
sources.
5.4.1 Production
Coffee seeds and seedlings must be of the best appropriate cultivar quality so as to
maximize on the reducing acreages and start with a strong crop. Also farm level
agronomic practices and methods need to be improved through continuous and
appropriate information dissemination and demonstrations. Here the role of government
field based agricultural officers needs to be strengthened through County based policies
and initiatives. Given the importance of rapid coffee transportation, roads, especially
rural access roads, should be made all weather and easily accessible through grading,
and building of bridges and culverts. Another recommendation is that credit to farmers
should be availed through strategic partnerships with financial institutions as well as
operationalizing the long proposed Coffee Development Fund.
54
5.4.2 Marketing
Farmers need to effectively organize so that they can bargain with factory management
and millers when selling coffee. Using their strength in numbers, they should insist on
transparency in milling operations by all the millers and immediate payment, preferably
after two weeks, following coffee sales by the marketing agent. Farmers need to work
closely with the county officials to pass laws and policies at the county level that will
promote the proper management and marketing of coffee. These laws should address
among other things; the nature of participation and consultation with farmers, minimum
standards for coffee management members, guidelines on information dissemination
among others. Farmers must also demand for information along the chain of coffee
marketing and must seek to influence to their advantage every step of coffee marketing.
Marketing of coffee should be further liberalized to ensure that small scale farmers are
not unduly disadvantaged, towards this, pulping licenses should be availed to all that
require them without delay. The perpetual problem of debt overhang to coffee farmers
must be resolved to give them a fresh start, selective write offs should be part of the
tools to address this issue.
5.4.3 Competition from alternative livelihood sources
Coffee growing and other livelihood activities adopted by coffee farmers should not
necessarily be seen as competing. Strategies should be developed through awareness
creation about how these activities can be carried out in ways that mutually enhance
each other, working towards overall increment of income for farmers. More so, farmers
should be educated on activities that can support each other, for example, coffee and
55
dairy, coffee and avocado growing; which can be carried out on the same piece of land
and whose peak seasons are different so as to maximize on available labor, etc.
5.5. Area for Further Research
Research needs to be carried out into gender dynamics on coffee production in Gikondi
location. While Nyeri County is seen as one area where advances in gender parity have
been made and women are especially empowered, the research established that coffee
growing and indeed control over other sources of livelihood is still heavily male
dominated. While women provided labor for growing coffee, they did not control how
the proceeds were used. Furthermore, land as a critical means of production was still
largely owned and controlled by men, with women only having partial user rights. The
proposed research would look into how ownership and control of livelihood sources
including coffee by men adversely affects women's empowerment and how women
have responded to this exclusion and dispossession.
56
REFERENCES
Bangura, Y. (1984). The deepening economic crisis and its political implications.
Africa Development.
Bourdiue, P. (1986) The Forms of Capital. Handbook of Theory and Research for
Sociology of Education. J Richardson New York .Green word press.
Chan, P., Marta A., Mihretu, M., & Tamiru, K. (2010). Microeconotnic 0.[
Competitiveness Country.Kenya Cluster: Tea.
Chege, J. ( 2013). Impact of 'farmers knowledge, attitude and land use practices status
on the conservation 0.[ Hinde's Babbler 111Mukurwe-ini valley, Nyeri county
Coleman, J.(l988). Social Capital and Creation 0.[Human Capital. The American
Journal of Sociology. 94 (supplement) S95-S 120.
Edwards, S. (1988).Ecollomic Development and Cultural Change. Exchange controls,
devaluations, and real exchange rates: The Latin American experience. Cambridge
Press.
Forrest, ST. (1993). Politics and Economic Development ill Nigeria. Westview, Boulder
Colorado.
Ikiara, M. (1990). Inditstrialisation in Kenya. In Search of a Strategy. Nairobi. East
57
Africa Publishers.
lkiara, M. (2000). Fishermen Resistance to Exit Fisheries. Marine Resource
Economics, 14, 199-213
Ikiara, M. (1999). Sustainability, Livelihoods, Production and Effort Supply ill a
Declining Fishery: The case of Kenya's Lake Victoria fisheries. Published Ph.D.
thesis, University of Amsterdam.
Kagira, E.K., Kimani, S.W.,& Githii,K.S.(2012). Sustainable Methods of Addressing
Challenges Facing Small Holder Tea Sector ill Kenya: A Supply Chain Management
Approach. Journal of Management and Sustainability, 2 (2)
Lhonvbere, J.O. (1996). Economic crisis, structural adjustment and Africa's future? In
Emeagwanli, T.G. Women Pay the Price: Structural Adjustment ill Africa and
Caribbean. Africa World Press, New Jersey,
Mbataru, p. ( 2013) A history ofcoffeefarming history ill Nyeri COUlltY.Unpublished
PhD thesis, Nairobi, Kenya.
Mbataru, P. (2008) Horizontal Diversification ill Agribusiness. The case of Post Coffee
Economy in Kenya
Mbataru, P. (2009). The Coffee Crisis. Old Interest, New interest and Illusions of
58
Development.
Murunga, G., Nasong'o, S. (editors) 2007. The strugglefor Democracy. Nairobi, Kenya
Mwega, F.,& Ndulu K. (1994). Economic Adjustment Policies. Tn Barkan, J.D. Beyond
Capitalism verses Socialism in Kenya and Tanzania. Nairobi, East African
Educational Publishers. Kenya
Nyangito, H., & Kimura, J. (1999). Provision of Agricultural services in a Liberalized
Economy. The case of the Smallholder Tea Sector in Kenya. Kenya Institute of Policy
Analysis and Research, Nairobi.
Olukoshi, A. (1991). A II Assessment of the Economic Recovery Programme ofthe
Nigerian State 011 the Manufacturing Sector. A Kano Case Study. Final Report to the
Social Science Council of Nigeria, Ibadan
Olukoshi, A. (1998). Africa beyond structural adjllstments.(l44) Copenhagen. The
Nordic African Institute Publishers.
Olukoshi, A. (1993). The politics ofstructural adjustment in Nigeria. Nigeria. lbadan
University.
Rono, J. K. (2002). The impact of the structural adjustment programmes in Kenyan
society. Journal of Social Development in Africa, 17, I
59
Swal11I11Y,G. (1994). Adjustment ill Africa. Lessons from Country Case Studies.
Washington, DC, World Bank
Teriba, 0., & M.O.Kayode (1977). Industrial Development in Nigeria. Ibadan
University Press, lbadan
The Odama Report (1983). Report ofthe National Economic Council Expert Committee
on the State ofthe Economy. Federal Government of Nigeria. Lagos.
World Bank & UNDP (1993). Kenya. Challenge a/Promoting Exports. Washington,
DC, World Bank.
60
APPENDICES
Appendix T: Question guide
Bio data
[ would like to start by asking you a few questions about yourself
1. How old are you? {Tick appropriately}
{Below 30 years} {31-45 years} {46-60 years} {Over 60 years}
2. Sex of the respondent (don't ask)
{Male} {Female}
3. What is your marital status?
{Single} {Married} {Separated}
4. If married, how many children do you have?
{One or two} {Three to five} {More than six)
5. What is the highest level of education that you reached?
{Primary} {Secondary} {College} {University}
Challenges around coffee production
6. How long have you been a coffee farmer?
{Less than 5 years} {6-20 years} {More than 20 years}
61
7. What made you become a coffee farmer?
8. What is your current acreage under coffee? Has it changed overtime? Why?
9. How can you compare coffee growing when you begun and now?
lO. What have been some of the challenges you have faced as a coffee farmer?
11. How have those challenges impacted on coffee growing?
12. What assets and capitals (like human resource, financing etc) do you have to
help you in coffee production?
13. How do you work with others, both in and outside your family towards coffee
production?
Challenges around coffee marketing
14. How do you market your coffee?
15. Do you work with cooperatives? How?
16. Do you have information on how your coffee is marketed?
17. Do you have a say/choice 111 the channels through which your coffee IS
marketed?
18. Are you satisfied with how and the institutions that market your coffee? If no,
why?
19. What improvements would you want to see in coffee marketing?
Competition from alternative livelihood sources
62
20. Do you supplement the income from your coffee? And if so, why?
21. What other activities and crops do you undertake and grow to supplement coffee
income?
22. Out of all these activities including coffee, which is the highest income earner?
23. If not coffee, why do you continue to grow it?
24. How does your diversification affect the production of coffee?
25. In your opinion, what more could be done for you to benefit more from coffee?
Thank you for your time.
63
Appendix II; List of Names of the Respondents.
Interview's
Respondents Name Gender Date
Kinyua Nduatis Male 17.09.2004
Wangai Gaitho Male 19.09.2014
Gachangi Muchina Male 23.09.2014
Waitathu Kinya Male 20.09.2014
Njoki Waigera Female 20.09.2014
Gituku Kimathi Male 16.09.2014
Mbanya Nyika Male 17.09.2014
Lucy Muthoni Kiama Female 02.10.2014
Mukenye Kabira Male 24.09.2014
Stephen Kihara Male 25.09.2014
Murathe Ndegwa Male 25.09.2014
Deadan Kimathi Male 16.09.2014
Kinyua Kagio Male 30.09.2014
Njeri Muthuo Female 02.10.2014
Wambugu Kaigua Male 02.10.2014
Wanjiru Kaigua Female 22.09.2014
Joseph Murira Male 01.10.2014
Maihua Kihuria male 30.09.2014
Kariithi Ngare Male 22.0"1.2014
Waitathu Kinogu Male 01.10.2014
64
Appendix m. Map of Gikondi Location
65
Appendix IV Research Permit.
THIS IS TO CERTIFYTHAT:
MISS. CHARITY NJERI KIMATHI
of KENYATTA UNIVERSITY, 468-10103
Mukurwe-ini,has been permitted to
conduct research in Nyerl County
on the topic: CHAllENGES
EXPERIENCED BY COFFEE FARMERS IN
KENYA, A CASE OF COFFEE FARMERS IN
GIKONDI LOCATION, NYERI COUNTY.
for the period ending:
31st December,2014
.......~: .
AppUcant's
Signature
Permit No : NACOSTI/P/14/1116/4211
Date Of Issue: 25th November,201.4
Fee Recieved :Ksh. 1000
. ~~;;;~ .
National Commission for Science,
Technology &r Innovation
COr ,DlTlONS
1. You m st report to the County Commissioner and
the County Education Officer of the area before
embarking on your research, Failure to do that
may lead to the cancellation of your permit
2. Government Officers wiDnot be interviewed
without prior appointment.
3. No questionnaire will be used unless it bas been
approved.
4. Enavation, mming and collection of biologica)
specimens are subject to further permission from
the relevant Government Ministries.
5. You are required to submit at least two(2) bard
copies and one( 1) soft copy of your fmal report.
6. The Government of Kenya reserves the rigbt to
modify the conditions of this permit including
its canceDation without notic:~I¥..a.l&
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
National Commission for Science,
Technology and Innovation
RESEARCH CLEARANCE
PERMIT
Serial. o. A
CONDITIO S: see back page