Agricultural Waste Utilisation Strategies and

Demand for Urban Waste Compost: Evidence

from Smallholder Farmers in Ethiopia
Abebe Nigussie, Thom Kuyper, Andreas de Neergaard1
Abstract – Competition between fuel and feed is the major cause (N), phosphorus (P), and potassium (K) across different
for the insufficient application of agricul­tural waste on cropland. farmers group. Three farms were selected from each farmers
The aims of this study were therefore (i) to investigate variation
group. Soil, plant, manure and water samples were then
in agricultural waste allocation between different typologies of
farmerlink this with partial nutrient balances, (ii) to identify farm analysed for N, P and K.
characteristics that influence utilisation of agricultural waste for Categorical principal component analysisand two­step
soil amendment, and (iii) to assess demand for urban waste clustering were used to classify the farmers into four distinct
compost. Four groups of farmers, namely (i) field crop farmers, groups.The contingency valuation method (CVM) was
(ii) vegetable producers, (iii) ornamental plant growers, and (iv) implemented to estimate the demand for urban waste
farmers practising mixed farming, were identified. Field crop
compost. A binary logit model was also used to determine
farmers produced the largest quantity of agricultural waste, but
they allocated 80% of manure for fuel and 85% of crop residues socioeconomic variables that influence allocation of agricultural
for feed. Only <10% of manure and crop residues were applied waste and compost demand.
on soils. These farmers also sold manure and crop residues, and
this generated 5­10% of their annual income. In contrast, RESULTS
vegetable and ornamental plant growers allocated over 40% of Current Uses of Agricultural Waste
manure and crop residues for soil amendment. Hence, the
nutrient balance was more positive in vegetable production
Agricultural waste utilisation varied significantly (P<0.001)
systems. Education, farm size, land tenure and access to between the different farmer groups. Field crop farmers
extension services were the variables that influenced allocation allocated over 80% of manure to fuel consumption and only 5­
of agricultural waste for soil amendment and compost demand.1 10% to soil amendment. In contrast, ornamental plant
Keywords ­ Animal manure, Crop residue, municipal waste, urban producers allocated 34% of manure to fuel and 56% to soil.
farming Field crop producers and mixed farmers allocated over 83%
and 76% of crop residues to animal feed respectively whereas
INTRODUCTION vegetable producers retained 62% of crop residues on their
Small fractions of animal manure and crop residues are field. Manure and crop residues also served as income sources.
retained on croplands in many developing countries due to Many respondents sold manure and crop residues (i.e.teff
high competition of agricultural waste with other uses such as (Eragrostistef) and earned more than $50 yr­1. This is
feed and fuel(Baudron et al., 2014).It is therefore essential to equivalent to 5­10% of their annual income. The econometric
identify socioeconomic characteristics that impede farmers to analysis (Table I) showed that farmers who have access to
allocate agricultural waste for soil amendment. We education and extension services allocated manure and crop
hypothesize that farmers with a different production goal and residues mainly for soil amendment. In contrast, farmers with
socioeconomic status have different waste utilisation insecure landownership and large farm size utilised agricultural
strategies. For example, subsistence field crop farmers may waste mainly for household fuel consumption and animal feed.
prefer to utilise agricultural waste for feed or fuel. In contrast,
vegetable producers might apply more manure and retain Demand for urban waste compost
more crop residues on field because vegetable production More than 58%of our respondents expressed a willingness to
demands a high nutrient input and generates a rapid economic contribute money and/or labour for urban waste com­post;
return (Abdulkadir et al., 2012). Similarly,land entitlement however, the bid varied significantly (P<0.01) be­tween the
might encourage farmers to allocate large quantities of farmers groups. Ornamental plant growers expressed the
agricultural waste for soil amendment. Availability of labour highest price for 100kg compost (US$ 1.76) whereas field crop
and farm sizecould also determine farmers’ decisions to farmers bid the lowest price (US$ 0.60). We observed that
allocate agricultural waste for soil amendment since many field crop producers preferred to contribute labour
investment is required to transport agricultural waste (Tittonell rather than money for urban waste com­post. Our result also
et al., 2005). Other organic resources such as urban waste demonstrated that farmers who have experience on organic
should also be considered as an alternative option for soil amendments showed the highest compost demand. The
amendment in farming systemswhere competition of econometrics analysis (Table I) showed that education,
agricultural waste is a major concern. Thus,the objectives of landownership, experience with organic amendments and
this study were: (i) to investigate the utilisation of agricultural accesses to extension services were the variables that
waste between different urban farmers and link this with determined the demand for urban waste compost.
partial nutrient balances, (ii) to identify farm characteristics
that influence farmers’ decisions to use agricultural waste as a Table I: Parameter estimates of socioeconomic variables that
soil amendment, and (iii) to assess the demand for non­ influence farmers’ decisions to use agricultural waste for soil
agricultural waste (i.e. urban waste) compost. amendment and willingness to pay
Waste for soil WTP
METHODOLOGY Variables Coefficient Wald Coefficient Wald
The study was conducted in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Farms that Education 0.34* 2.47 0.94* 2.98
represent the existing urban farming systems were selected Labour 0.10 0.86 0.04 0.26
using field observation and secondary sources. A total of 220 Land size (ha) ­0.60*** 6.92 ­0.03 0.03
farmers were then randomly selected andclassified into four TLU 0.04 0.90 ­0.06 2.54
groups based on their production goal and livelihood Soil fertility problem 1.29** 3.40 0.03 0.00
strategies.Individual farmers were interviewed about their Experience on compost NA NA 2.43** 13.20
agricultural waste utilization strategies and willingness to use Land tenure (%) 0.89* 2.01 1.85** 12.97
urban waste compost as alternative soil amendment. Extension service 1.01* 2.38 1.66** 8.54
Samples were collected from soil, plant, irrigation water, Constant ­4.55 9.26*** 3.21
manure and compost to quantify partial balances of nitrogen Chi­square values 55.5*** 132.3**
*, ** and *** denote significance at P<0.05, P<0.01 and
1
AbebeNigussie is from Copenhagen University department of plant and P<0.001, respectively; NA = Not applicable; TLU = Tropical
environ­ment (nigatu@plen.ku.dk); Thomas Kuyper is from Wageningen livestock unit; WTP = Willingness to pay
University depart­ment of soil quality (thom.kuyper@wur.nl); Andreas de
Neergaard is from Copenha­gen University department of plant and
environment (and@plen.ku.dk)
290
 DISCUSSION demand for urban waste compost among our respondents.
The nitrogen balance was negative in mixed farming and field Consistent with this finding, 70% of farmers in Cameroon
crop production systems, but positive (20 Kg ha­1 yr­1) in (Folefack, 2005) and over 80% of farmers in Ghana (Dansoet
vegetable farms. The partial balance for potassium was al., 2006) are interested to accept urban waste compost. In
negative in all urban and peri­urban farming systems (data our study, the respondents bid very small amounts of money
not shown).The negative nutrient balancesin our study could for compost compared with the previous studies (Folefack,
be resulted from the application of inorganic fertilisers below 2005;Dansoet al., 2006). However, the current bids were
the recommended rate(Kassie et al., 2009) and insufficient almost twice as high as previous studies when labour is
application of organic amendments. We observed that the included to estimate compost demand. This implies that labour
application of manure and compost was limited. Furthermore, should be included in addition to money to estimate compost
only vegetable producers and few farmers who practised demand because resource­poor farmers expressed their
mixed farming used irrigation.Previous studies showed that compost demand via a willingness to contribute labour since
irrigation is the main source of plant nutrients in urban and labour is readily available and cheaper than money in
peri­urban agricultural systems (Abdulkadir et al., 2012; Khai developing countries. We confirmed that education and
et al., 2007). Nevertheless, only 21 Kg N ha­1 yr­1, 2.4 Kg P creating awareness is crucial to increase the adoption of urban
ha­1 yr­1 and 55 Kg K ha­1 yr­1 were added from irrigationin waste compost.To conclude, competition for agricultural waste
the area.Negative nutrient balances in our study but positive between fuel and feed is a major cause for limited application
nutrient balances in the previous studies (Abdulkadir et al., of organic amendmentsin developing countries. Hence,
2012; Khai et al.,2007) under similar production systems replacement of fuel and feed through sustainable means other
suggested site­specific analysis of nutrient balances. Farmers than farm waste is crucial. Urban waste compost could also be
withsimilar production orientation could have different input an alternative soil amendment for urban farming systems.
uses and soil fertility management strategies. Furthermore, Finally, we suggest that both labour and cash should be used
farmers under similar production systems could vary in terms to estimate compost demand.
of socioeconomic characteris­tics and livelihood assets.
High competition of agricultural waste with other uses such REFERENCES
as fuel and feed is the main reason for limited application of Abdulkadir, A., Leffelaar, PA., Agbenin, JO., and Giller, KE.
organic amendments and thereby results negative nutrient (2012). Nutrient flows and balances in urban and peri­urban
balance in the area. We observed that the use of agricultural agroecosystem of Kano, Nigeria. Part of a PhD thesis
waste for fuel could continue into the future because other submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of
energy sources (i.e. kerosene and electricity) are not doctor at Wageningen, The Nether­lands.
affordable and/or accessible for many farmers.Interestingly, Baudrona, F, Jaleta, M., Okitoi, O., and Tegegn, A.
many urban dwellers also use cattle dung as fuel, probably (2014).Conservation agriculture in African mixed crop­
due to high poverty in the urban areas.The demand for dung livestock systems: Conservation agriculture in African mixed
as fuel creates market opportunities for many farmers to sell crop­livestock systems: Expanding the niche. Agriculture,
cattle dung to nearby markets.Crop residues, especially from Ecosystem and Environment 187:171­182
teff (Eragrostistef), are also used as building material. The
high demand for building material also creates market Danso, G., Drechsel, P., Fialor, S.andGiordano M. (2006).
opportunities for many field crop farmers to sell their crop Estimating the demand for municipal waste compost via
residues.Agricultural waste generated 5­10% of farmers’ farmers' willingness­to­pay in Ghana. Waste Management.
annual income.The current use of agricultural waste observed 26(12):1400­1409.
in our study is consistence withValbuena et al., (2015) who Folefack, A. (2005).The Use of Compost from Household
reported allocation of 80% crop residues for feed and less than Waste in Agriculture: Economic and Environmental Analysis in
20% of crop residues for soil amendment in sub­Saharan and Cameroon. ed Doppler W., and Bauer S. Farming & Rural
South Asian counties. Hence, our results suggest technology Systems Economics. Germany
interventions that encourage farmers to use other sources of Kassie, M., Zikhali, P., Manjur, K., and Edwards, S. (2009).
fuel such as fuel wood, so that agricultural waste could be Adoption of Organic Farming Techniques: Evidence from a
used mainly for soil amendment. Intensification of crop and Semi­Arid Region of Ethiopia. Environment for Development
livestock production could also be viable option to feed the Discussion Paper Series 09­01
livestock as well as utilise crop residues for soil amendment.
We observed variation in allocation of agricultural waste Khai,NM.,Ha, PQ., and Öborn, I. (2007). Nutrient flows in
between different farmers groups. The variations could be due small­scale peri­urban vegetable farming systems in Southeast
to differences in socioeconomic characteristics and level of Asia: A case study in Hanoi. Agriculture, Ecosystems and
intensification.In general, intensified urban production systems Environment 122 (2007) 192–202
(e.g ornamental and vegetable production systems) and Jaleta, M., Kassie, M., and Erenstein, O. (2014). Determinants
farmers with better access to livelihood assets utilise of maize stover utilization as feed, fuel and soil amendment in
agricultural waste mainly for soil amendment.For example, mixed crop­livestock systems, Ethiopia.Agricultural Systems.
insecure landownership impeded many field crop farmers from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2014.08.010
using agricultural waste for soil amendment because land
Tittonell, P.,Vanlauwe, B.,Leffelaar, PA., Rowe, EC.,and Giller,
tenure prevents farmers from investing in their farmlands
KE. (2005). Exploring diversity in soil fertility management of
(Kassie et al., 2009). High cattle density in field crop
smallholder farms in western Kenya: I. Heterogeneity at
production system could also be another reason to retain small
region and farm scale. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment
fraction of crop residues on farmlands. Education, extension
110 (3–4): 149–165
services and compost experience were also influence allocation
of agricultural waste for soil amendment (Table I), probably Valbuena, D., Tui SH., Erenstein O.,Teufel N., Duncan
due to increasing farmers’ awareness about the benefits of A.,Abdoulaye T.,Swain B.,Mekonen K., Germaine I., Gérard B.
organic amendments. Similarly, Jaleta et al., (2014) report the (2015). Identifying determinants, pressures and trade­offs of
significant influence of extension services on the retention of crop residue use in mixed smallholder farms in Sub­Saharan
crop residues on farmland. Africa and South Asia. Agricultural Systems 134: 107–118
Urban waste compost could be alternative soil amendment
for urban agricultural systems where competition of
agricultural waste is a major concern. We observed a high

291

Downloaded from https://cabidigitallibrary.org by 196.188.51.240, on 03/26/24.

Subject to the CABI Digital Library Terms & Conditions, available at https://cabidigitallibrary.org/terms-and-conditions