Is Sorghum a waste of time?
Musings of an Agricultural Economist
Introduction
Sorghum is a climate-resilient coarse cereal that provides a sustainable source of food, feed, and fodder. However, due to processing gaps and poor market links, its consumption demand is declining. Sorghum production has been widely promoted among smallholder farmers due to its ability to thrive in drought-prone conditions and low input requirements when compared to other staple cereals such as maize. Low output has been attributed to low productivity, unreliable rainfall, insufficient infrastructure, and production and marketing support structures[1].
Aside from its production advantages, sorghum use has evolved from supplementing household staple food needs to industrial use in sectors such as commercial beer brewing, food processing, and feed production. Increased industrial utilization has increased marketing opportunities for sorghum producers, potentially increasing crop production income[2].
Sorghum production is promoted in Zambia, primarily in arid areas, to meet household food security and family income. Sorghum has historically been grown primarily for household brewing and grain needs. Sorghum producers can be found throughout the country, particularly in arid areas such as the southern province and the valley areas of the eastern province. Sorghum productivity is generally low, with actual farmer yields falling short of potential yields. Low productivity has been attributed to a variety of factors, including the use of low yielding cultivars, particularly among rural farmers, and a lack of technology adoption and input. Several improved varieties have entered the seed market, including Sima, Kuyuma, ZSV12, ZSV15, WP-13, MMSH-375, MMSH413, MMSH-1324 and MMSH-1257[3].
Food feed crops play a cardinal role in mixed crop-livestock production systems yet views of farmers on their usage are limited. Farmers’ perceptions in predominant sorghum growing areas of Zambia were solicited on socio-economic factors affecting sorghum production, awareness and willingness to adopt dual-purpose sorghum cultivars for food and feed[4]
Despite its nutritional value, sorghum consumption has been steadily declining over the last three decades. The decrease in sorghum consumption is primarily due to the laborious and time-consuming process involved in food preparation, as well as the government's policy of providing fine cereals at subsidized prices. As a result, efforts on sorghum must be reoriented to generate demand through value-addition of its processed food commodities, feed, and industrial products.[5]
Consumption
The decrease in sorghum consumption is primarily due to the laborious and time-consuming process involved in food preparation, as well as the government's policy of providing fine cereals at subsidized prices. As a result, efforts on sorghum must be reoriented to generate demand through the value-addition of its processed food commodities, feed, and industrial products.[6]
WHY IS PRODUCTION SO LOW IN ZAMBIA
Low productivity in sorghum production has been attributed to, among other things, use of low yielding cultivars especially among rural farmers, and low technology adoption and input use. Increasing productivity in smallholder agriculture has been identified as one of the main ways of improving farm incomes and economic wellbeing of the farmers. Thus, promotion of productivity enhancing initiatives[7].
Competition with maize
Because sorghum is a cereal, put against its competitor maize, it has very little chance as a substitute in food but perhaps in certain feed formulas as some studies have shown. Based on a research done on quails, the authors found it reasonable to conclude that non-tannin white sorghum can effectively substitute maize in maize-based stock-feed diets partially or completely for quails and other poultry. Perhaps this might also be true for substituting maize in stock-feed for aquaculture (fish farming). Since sorghum can be grown at a cheaper price, it means that it is more cost effective to use sorghum in the production of stock-feed. However, additional studies are required before making further claims [8] Sorghum can significantly reduce the competition for maize and even allow for excess maize produced in the country to be exported and hence more foreign exchange can be earned from maize. This way sorghum can effectively contribute to the National Gross Domestic Product (NGDP). The competitive advantage of sorghum is principally derived from its relative resilience. Sorghum is more suited to areas with marginal soils, high temperature and low rainfall than maize. Sorghum can grow and produce under conditions of drought, heat stress and unpredictable rainfall making it a hardier crop. The development and use of sorghum in the food and feed industry systems should be viewed as a contribution to national economic growth rather than competition with maize. Policies and investment strategies should be designed to exploit the competitive advantages of sorghum[9]
What will drive the sorghum market
Despite the praises sung for the drought resistant crop and healthy benefits of this cereal, production and popularity of this cereal remain low, leaving us to question what then will be the direction for this crop, that is slowly dying out? Should it be written off our list of commodities to enable Zambia achieve food security , sustainability and alleviate hunger in the country, or is there hope that tastes and preferences may begin to swing towards sorghum? It is clear that the driver for sorghum has to be the market, tastes of consumers locally, or innovative ways to use sorghum that will drive demand and hence production will respond.
In essence, the adoption of improved sorghum varieties will tend to be driven by the generation of new markets rather than the supply of new technology. This will in turn increase the margins that accrue to the farmers. The government of Zambia has however adopted a double-edged approach of both market and technology driven incentives to catalyze sorghum adoption and marketing in arid Southern parts of the country. Interestingly, sorghum producers in Zambia reported impacts of market price on margins.[10] Studies on successful implementation of sorghum in India led to farm incomes having increased to twofold. Through various entrepreneurship development trainings and creation of nationally recognized successful piloted value chain (VC) model on sorghum. [11]
Some challenges small scale farmers faced
Processors add the greatest value but also incur the highest level of input costs in the chain. This is as opposed to farmers who generate the lowest value addition component and also the lowest production costs. The observation can be explained by the low input demands for sorghum production as a resilient crop which is rarely attacked by for example insects and pests. In The study area, farmers also rarely apply any fertilizer to the crop throughout the farming season.[12]
Sorghum and pearl millet rank second and third, respectively, as important staple cereals after maize. There are new market developments in the beer industry requiring farmers to increase productivity and production These markets can significantly affect access to improved seed, and thus increase decisions on utilization Even though market developments indicate great potential for the two crops, their supply has remained erratic (Larson et al. 2006)cited by [13]
Unreliable product markets and poor extension delivery systems were highly ranked as the extremely severe challenge by farmers while labor shortages were the least problematic challenge. Farmers highlighted a number of possible intervention mechanisms including vertical and horizontal integration in current markets. However generally farmers did not value the need to penetrate more rewarding markets or strengthen the cooperatives as potential options out of the marketing challenges. The need for training was also echoed by sorghum farmers in Lusitu as a potential option to improved market access. Farmers also suggested that they could benefit greatly from government subsidy programs on sorghum as is the current case with maize. They stated that this program can include inputs such as seed and fertilizer as well as support in the output market in terms of subsidized transport and guaranteed prices for their produce.[14]
Can anything be done?
Countries around the world such as India, have a more robust use for the commodity as compared to Zambia. Some of the semi processed sorghum foods, include flakes, pasta and vermicelli could have potential in Zambia as if the industry develops and tastes of the consumers evolve with it. Thoughts on what should be done. What we need to consider in Zambia is to evaluate the economic benefits realized by the sorghum farmers in the value chain on sorghum foods in Zambia
Photo by Klaus Nielsen: https://www.pexels.com/photo/woman-demonstrating-pasta-covered-with-flour-6287431/
To assess the market feasibility of sorghum products developed through processing interventions in the pilot testing of value chain in Zambia. Identify possible innovations and markets for the product that
SOURCES
Chikuta, S, T Odong, F Kabi, M Mwala, and P Rubaihayo. “Farmers Perceptions on Dual-Purpose Sorghum and Its Potential in Zambia.” International Journal of Agricultural Research, Innovation and Technology 4, no. 2 (2015): 76–81. https://doi.org/10.3329/ijarit.v4i2.22654.
Chimai, Bernadette C. “Determinants of Technical Efficiency in Smallholder Sorghum Farming in Zambia,” 2011.
Dayakar Rao, B. “Chapter 23 - Sorghum Value Chain for Food and Fodder Security.” In Breeding Sorghum for Diverse End Uses, edited by C Aruna, K.B.R.S. Visarada, B Venkatesh Bhat, and Vilas A Tonapi, 409–19. Woodhead Publishing Series in Food Science, Technology and Nutrition. Woodhead Publishing, 2019. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-101879-8.00023-1.
Godfrey, Chagwiza, Zivenge Emmanuel, Chivuraise Chipo, Munyati Vincent, Jp P Joseph P. Musara, Joseph and Chimvuramahwe, R. Borerwe, et al. “An Assessment on Factors Affecting Urban Vegetable Production in Harare , Zimbabwe.” Journal of Animal and Plant Science 1, no. 4 (2013): 416–24. https://doi.org/10.12966/jaerd.08.06.2014.
Hamukwala, Priscilla. “CHAINS IN ZAMBIA : OPPORTUNITIES AND Priscilla Hamukwala University of Zambia,” 2010.
Mbulwe, Lloyd, Mukachikwikwi Hamakoko, George Mhango, Mathew Moonga, and Hezel Syankwede. “Effect of Substituting Maize Based Stock-Feed Diets with Sorghum on the Performance of Quails.” European Journal of Agriculture and Food Sciences 2, no. 5 (2020): 5–8. https://doi.org/10.24018/ejfood.2020.2.5.115.
Me-Nsope, Nathalie, and Michelle Larkins. “Impact of Innovations in Value Chain on Sorghum Farmers.” Journal of Gender, Agriculture and Food Security 1, no. 3 (2016): 1–22.
Musara, Joseph P, Lighton Dube, and Joyce Bediako. “Experiential Marketing Margin Analysis of the Sorghum Based Stockfeed Value Chain in Lusitu , Chirundu District , Zambia” 2, no. 4 (2014): 140–49. https://doi.org/10.12966/jaerd.11.02.2014.
[1] Bernadette C Chimai, “Determinants of Technical Efficiency in Smallholder Sorghum Farming in Zambia,” 2011.
[2] Chimai.
[3] Chimai.
[4] S Chikuta et al., “Farmers Perceptions on Dual-Purpose Sorghum and Its Potential in Zambia,” International Journal of Agricultural Research, Innovation and Technology 4, no. 2 (2015): 76–81, https://doi.org/10.3329/ijarit.v4i2.22654.
[5] Nathalie Me-Nsope and Michelle Larkins, “Impact of Innovations in Value Chain on Sorghum Farmers,” Journal of Gender, Agriculture and Food Security 1, no. 3 (2016): 1–22.
[6] Me-Nsope and Larkins.
[7] Chimai, “Determinants of Technical Efficiency in Smallholder Sorghum Farming in Zambia.”
[8] Lloyd Mbulwe et al., “Effect of Substituting Maize Based Stock-Feed Diets with Sorghum on the Performance of Quails,” European Journal of Agriculture and Food Sciences 2, no. 5 (2020): 5–8, https://doi.org/10.24018/ejfood.2020.2.5.115.
[9] Mbulwe et al.
[10] Joseph P Musara, Lighton Dube, and Joyce Bediako, “Experiential Marketing Margin Analysis of the Sorghum Based Stockfeed Value Chain in Lusitu , Chirundu District , Zambia” 2, no. 4 (2014): 140–49, https://doi.org/10.12966/jaerd.11.02.2014.
[11] B Dayakar Rao, “Chapter 23 - Sorghum Value Chain for Food and Fodder Security,” in Breeding Sorghum for Diverse End Uses, ed. C Aruna et al., Woodhead Publishing Series in Food Science, Technology and Nutrition (Woodhead Publishing, 2019), 409–19, https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-101879-8.00023-1.
[12] Musara, Dube, and Bediako, “Experiential Marketing Margin Analysis of the Sorghum Based Stockfeed Value Chain in Lusitu , Chirundu District , Zambia.”
[13] Priscilla Hamukwala, “CHAINS IN ZAMBIA : OPPORTUNITIES AND Priscilla Hamukwala University of Zambia,” 2010.
[14] Chagwiza Godfrey et al., “An Assessment on Factors Affecting Urban Vegetable Production in Harare , Zimbabwe,” Journal of Animal and Plant Science 1, no. 4 (2013): 416–24, https://doi.org/10.12966/jaerd.08.06.2014.