PHD Proposal (Oleke, J.M.)

PhD PROPOSAL
The impact of classical biological control of coconut mite on
income and food security: A stakeholders and socioeconomic
analysis of coconut production in Africa and Sri Lanka
By
Oleke, Jofrey Masahi

1.0 Introduction
The coconut palm and its fruit are regarded as one of the most important crops of the
tropics (Child 1974). Among its most important uses coconut is a food source, which
provides supplements for body fluids and minerals, and acts as an antihelminthic. The
liquid endosperm is also a media for invitro storage of semen and a growth regulator of
plants (Woodroof 1970). Copra, the dehydrated endosperm of the nut, is a source of oil
for food. Coconut oil is also used in cosmetics and pharmaceuticals. The material that
remains after the oil is pressed from copra is called oilcake and is used as animal feed
(Woodroof 1970). The coconut shell is used directly as fuel, filler and extender in the
synthesis of plastic, to make activated charcoal, household articles, and to produce
various distillation products, such as tar, woodspirit and pitch. Coir, a course fiber from
the husk of the nut, has various domestic and industrial uses. Coconut root is brewed and
used in folk medicine, for example, as a cure for dysentery (Woodroof 1970). The
possibility of utilizing the coconut palm wood on a commercial scale has been recognized
only in the last decade or so, although usage of wood from palm species has been known
by people in the villages since time immemorial. In more recent times, coconut palm
wood has been successfully utilized in a number of coconut growing countries such as the
Philippines, Indonesia, Sri Lanka, Fiji, the Tonga Islands and many others (Arancon,
1996). In Kerala state (India) coconut is the major industry. In Africa and Tanzania in
particular, poles and leaves are used for building materials and making furniture.
Coconut trees are grown in tropical countries mainly for the high oil content of the
endosperm (copra), which is widely used in both food and non-food industries. However,
a negative campaign against saturated fats in general, and the tropical oils in particular,
led to most food manufacturers abandoning coconut oil in recent years in favour of
hydrogenated polyunsaturated oils that come from the main cash crops in the US,
particularly soy, and contain trans fatty acids. Studies done on native diets high in
coconut consumption show that these populations are generally in good health, and don't
suffer as much from many of the modern diseases of western nations
(http://www.coconutoil.com/litalee.htm). Large coconut production areas, in particular,
are found along the coastal regions in the wet tropical areas of Asia in the Philippines,
1
Indonesia, India, Sri Lanka, Malaysia and Africa (see figure 1). In these countries
millions of people make a living from the coconut palm and its many products (Dam,
2002).
Figure 1. Coconut Production in Major

Producing Countries
35
30
Percentage Production
25
20
15
10
0
am i a
ia
ia
a
nd
e
ka
ia
sia
Am a
a
s
ric
qu
ic
ne
i
As
an
d
es
an
la
an
ay
In
er
Af
bi
pi
nz
ai
on
e
er
i-L
al
ilip
c
Th
er
Ta
d
O
th
M
Sr
In
th
Ph
oz
O
tin
O
M
La
Countries
Source: Extracted from Funds for Commodities Report (Coir Processing

Technologies), 2002.
Although good varieties of coconuts have been known to exist in the different coconut
growing countries of the world, no serious attempts were made to collect them and study
them in detail at a representative centre with a view to classify them systematically. The
commonly known varieties includes Tall Palm, which is the ordinary or the common tall
variety of palms most extensively grown on a plantation scale in all coconut tracts of the
world. The West Coast Variety otherwise known as the ordinary or common Tall variety
is commonly grown in India. Others include Laccadive Ordinary, Laccadive Small, New
Guinea, Cochin China, and Java grown mainly in India, Sri Lanka and Indonesia (Ikisan,
2009).The East African Tall and the other a dwarf (called Pemba Red Dwarf or simply
2
Pemba Dwarf) occur everywhere along the Tanzanian and Kenyan coastal coconut
growing area, probably also in Mozambique, Madagascar and the Philippines (Kullaya, et
al, 2002).
Coconut is a tropical crop that supports the livelihoods of many people. Coconut
contributes significantly to the economy of Sri Lanka and cultivation spans about 402649
ha which accounts for 21% of agricultural lands in the country. It contributes 2% to Sri
Lanka’s GDP, 2. 2.5% to export earnings and 5% to employment. Although these
numbers are modest, coconut is an important food crop in Sri Lanka in that it provides
about 22% of the per capita calorie intake in the diet, being second only to rice paddy, the
staple food of Sri Lankas. Coconut is almost exclusively grown as a rain fed crop in Sri
Lanka. Rainfall and temperature are the important climatic factor influencing the coconut
yield (Peiris, et al 1995), and by extension on the national coconut production, on, upon
which domestic culinary consumption and processing industry depend. In the Philippines,
coconut is mainly a smallholder crop and it occupies 23% of the country's total land
devoted to agricultural use while in Indonesia coconut area represents around 26% of the
entire plantations. In Indonesia, around 95% of the country's coconut area is situated in
the islands of Sumatra, Java, Sulawesi, Kalimantan, Nusa Tenggara, and Maluku. In
India, coconuts are grown mainly along the coastal belts and some interior tracts and
more than 90% of the area under coconut is concentrated in the Southern States of
Kerala, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh. Kerala accounts for 55% of India's
total coconut area (Dam, 2002). While the coconut industry in Vietnam contributes to the
economic welfare of some 10 million Vietnamese, and provides direct employment to
some one million people, in Malaysia the industry plays an important role in the country's
economy providing livelihood to some 100,000 farm families or almost 10% of the
nation's farming community. In West African coast including Benin, coconut is one of the
major crops that support the livelihoods of many communities. It contributes significantly
to the income of the people depending on it. The coconut producing countries continue to
produce due to the importance of the crop as a social crop. These countries realize the
potential coconut holds in economic development and poverty alleviation (Bashar, 2002).
Along the coastal belt of Tanzania, coconut is one of the important crops (Mwinjaka,
3
1999). It is produced in Dar es Salaam, Coast, Tanga, Lindi, Mtwara, Zanzibar, Pemba,
Mafia and inland region of Morogoro and on the shores of Lake Nyasa, Tanganyika and
Victoria. In Tanzania the population of palms was estimated at about 25 million. About
95 percent of the coconuts are grown by small-scale farmers while the rest are under
medium and large-scale plantations (Kullaya, 1999). Coconut is important as; the main
source of income for farmers in the coastal belt of Tanzania where 15 percent of the
country’s population live (Mwinjaka, 1999). The palm products in Tanzania are mainly
fresh coconuts, copra and coconut oil. It is estimated that of the total coconut production
40 percent is marketed as fresh coconuts and 20 percent is processed into copra and
coconut oil (Debus and Zills, 1981). Fresh coconuts are mainly used as a source of
coconut milk (“tui”) that is used for cooking purposes in most of the households in the
coconut growing areas (Magitta, 1989). Copra is processed into coconut oil which is used
for both cooking and industrial purposes – notably in soap making (Magitta, 1989). In
Zanzibar (Tanzania), coconut production constitutes a lager part of economic activities. It
became the second most important foreign exchange earner in Zanzibar, after cloves, and
it held this position for a long time (Kullaya, et al, 2002).
The coconut, like many plants is subject to attack by various pests and diseases. Often,
plants develop some defence mechanisms to local pests and diseases (Peiris, 2005). The
coreid bug, Pseudotheraptus wayi Brown (Heteroptera: Coreidae), the rhinoceros beetle,
Oryctes monoceros Oliv (Coleoptera:Scarabaeidae) and the coconut mite, Aceria
guerreronis Keifer have been identified as the major coconut pests of economic
importance. The major disease of coconut is the lethal disease (LD), which is caused by
phytoplasma. The symptoms of LD are very similar to those of Lethal Yellowing-type
disease in the Caribbean area and West Africa. They include premature nut fall, typical
blackening of the inflorescences, bronzing of progressively younger leaves, necrosis and
rot of the spear leaves and decay of the root system, in that order (Mwinjaka, 2009).
Increase in trade, tourism, transport and travel over the past century has dramatically
enhanced the spread of organisms (e.g. Wittenberg & Cock, 2001). As a result, biological
invasions by non-indigenous species constitute a leading threat to natural ecosystems and
4
biodiversity (Pimentel, 2002). Bioinvasions involving exotic pests are also an undesirable
element of the globalization of agriculture. Aceria guerreronis Keifer (Coconut mite) is
one of the exotic pests that pose a threat to the coconut industry. Accordingly, substantial
efforts to eradicate or control invasive mite have resulted in high economic costs
(Pimentel, 2000). A number of control measures mostly involving aerial application and
root feeding of chemical pesticides have been recommended, but a solution to eradicate
the mite menace is yet to be evolved. In India and Sri Lanka adoption of phytosanitary
measures in coconut gardens such as cleaning the crown of the palm, keeping the
plantation clean and burning of all immature nuts fallen due to mite infestation, spraying
biopesticides on the bunches and following palm health care practices have been the
traditional ways to control the mites (http://coconutboard.nic.in/protect1.htm).
Intercropping with the multipurpose leguminous tree, Gliricidia sepium

has been recommended by the Coconut Research Institute (CRI) in Sri
Lanka to control the mites and is well practiced by the farmers.
Intercropping of pineapple has also been successful in the western part
of the Jaffna peninsula. Mixed cropping systems, as well as those with
good ground sanitation, showed low mite infestations, except for mixed
coconut gardens with banana, which recorded the highest mite
infestation. Banana uses large amounts of potassium, the lack of which
in coconut may affect its water retention capacity. Mixing banana with
coconut is therefore not advised (CRI, 2008).
Effective control strategies generally require knowledge of the pest in their introduced
and native ranges (Roderick & Navajas, 2003) as is illustrated by the invasive spread of
the Mediterranean fruit fly, Ceratitis capitata (Wiedemann) (Diptera: Tephritidae), which
attacks coconut. For this species, a series of studies have used molecular data to
document the spread of the insect in its home range in sub-Saharan Africa (White &
Elson-Harris, 1992) to reach a nearly global distribution in less than 200 years (Fimiani,
1989). Besides describing the invasion pathways of the species, knowledge of the genetic
structure of fruit fly populations has helped to design control strategies including
5
quarantine and sterile insect release (Bohonak et al., 2001; Bonizzoni et al., 2001;
Gasperi et al., 2002; Baliraine et al., 2003). Similar knowledge has been used to study
coconut mite and design strategy to control it
The coconut mite, attacks young fruits of the coconut palm, to which it is almost
exclusively confined. The mites are small, with the largest stage around 250 µm in
length, but they often build up extremely large and dense populations, in which case their
feeding causes scarring and distortion of the fruits, and may cause premature fruit drop
(Moore & Howard, 1996). In fact, it is one of the worst arthropod pests of coconut palm
mostly spread by wind, whether grown as a crop tree or as an ornamental, and is the only
eriophyid mite that is a serious pest of coconut palm. It is distributed in many tropical
countries where coconuts grow. It is controversial whether it is native to the Eastern or
Western Hemisphere (UFIFAS, 2009).
1.1 Problem Statement and Justification
Aceria guerreronis has been reported to cause great losses to farmers and the coconut in-
dustry as whole as it kills coconut seedlings by feeding on growing tips (Aquino & Ar-
ruda, 1967). The survey carried out by the CRI in Sri Lanka revealed that the percentages
of mite infested nuts in the Anuradhapura, Pollonnaruwa, Rajangane, Puttalam and Kur-
unegala are 94.4%, 94.5%,90.5%, 81.1% and 69.8% respectively with a mean of 77.9 in
2001. In this study harvested nuts were monitored for one year at monthly intervals and
grouped into ‘mite free (undamaged)’ and ‘mite infested (damaged)’ nuts (Peiris, 2002).
Reductions in copra yield have been variable from 15–40% (Herna´ndez Roque, 1977;
Julia & Mariau, 1979; Muthiah & Bhaskaran, 2000; Nair & Koshy, 2000; Seguni, 2002).
Losses due to extensive premature dropping of fruits have been reported from 60% in
Colombia (Zuluaga & Sa´ nchez, 1971); 70% in Venezuela (Doreste, 1968), and 10–
100% (average 21%) in Tanzania (Seguni, 2002).
For communities whose livelihoods depend on coconut, a mite infestation poses a threat
to their life. Coconut grower is affected if the nuts are small or rejected due to mite
damaged. In some serious cases of mite infestation, all nuts may drop causing losses to
6
farmers income. Generally due to damage on coconut caused by mites; farmers usually
harvest small sized nuts. Small sized nuts fetch a lower price or are rejected causing loss
to growers. Peiris (2002) estimated loss of income for coconut growers in Sri Lanka to be
7% and 43% caused by rejected nuts and small sized nuts respectively. The study also
estimated the impacts of mites on the milling industries. It was found that de-husk weight
of a mite free large normal nut and mite infested large normal nut is 0.764 and 0.665 kg
resulting 13% loss while the percentage of loss in de-husk weight of small size normal
nut is 10.6%. In Tanzania, losses of growers income due to coconut mite is estimated to
be about 30-50% (Seguni, 2008). Despite its effects to the income, coconut mite also
poses a threat of food insecurity to the households growing coconut since coconut
contributes significantly to the their livelihoods.
Strategies to control coconut mite involving both biological control and quarantine
require knowledge of the ancestral localities and plant hosts of the mite. However, the
origin of the coconut mite is unknown. Almost simultaneously with its original
description in the 1960s, the mite was reported in Africa beginning with Gulf of Guinea
Islands in 1966, Benin in 1967, and in Tanzania during the 1980s. Several studies on
coconut mites have been conducted in the areas affected by the arthropod. In Brazil,
Benin and Tanzania a study was conducted to assess coconut mite abundance and damage
to coconut – and the associated predator fauna - in (Lawson et al. manuscript submitted;
Negloh et al. manuscript in prep.). In all of these localities, however, coconut mite
infestations were heavy, implying that the effects of these pests were huge.
Similar work had been conducted independently in Sri Lanka (Fernando et al. 2003).
Evaluation of the data collected to date indicates that coconut mite abundance and
damage to coconut are far less in Brazil than in Africa and Sri Lanka, and that the
predator fauna associated with coconut mite in Brazil is richer than what is found
elsewhere. In Tanzania the coconut mite has only recently been recognised as a serious
pest of coconut (Varela, 1992; Meena, 1996). During extensive surveys in Tanzania in
1992 and 1996 (Varela, 1992; Meena, 1996) the coconut mite was observed in all coconut
growing regions of Tanzania affecting all or most coconut varieties, but there were site
7
differences in severity of infestation. The southern regions of Mtwara and Lindi appeared
to be more seriously affected and were thought to be due to the unimodal rainfall pattern
(Varela, 1992). However, these findings have not been proved by subsequent surveys.
In attempt to control coconut mite, predatory mites found beneath the coconut perianth in
Florida and observed to prey on coconut mites include Amblyseius largoensis Muma,
Neoseiulus mumai Denmark, and N. paspalivorus DeLeon. In Puerto Rico, Bdella
distincta Baker and Bablock preyed on coconut mite and on Steneotarsonemus furcatus
(DeLeon) in the same habitat. In both of these localities, however, coconut mite
infestations were heavy, implying that the effects of these predators were insignificant.
The fungus, Hirsutella thomsonii (Fisher), which is widely distributed and known to
attack various species of mites, has been isolated from coconut mites in various countries,
as has H. nodulosa Petch in Cuba. Control of several species of mites with fungus has
been developed and applied, but success has often depended greatly on environmental
conditions. In general, these efforts have been most successful under humid conditions
favouring the development of the fungi (UFIFAS, 2009).
While previous efforts have identified the natural enemy fauna associated with coconut in
northern and northeastern Brazil, very little has been done to explore for natural enemies
of coconut mite in other countries in South and Central America (e.g., Mexico,
Venezuela, and Colombia). These are countries where the coconut mite is present but
there are no reports of serious damage to coconut, making them potential candidate for
foreign exploration. The identification and introduction of potential natural enemies of
coconut mite, and understanding their diversity and the ecological factors that affect
plant-pest-predator, and predator-predator interactions and their effects on coconut mite
control are of tremendous scientific interest. This study therefore becomes a part of a big
program, that will search for and characterize the biology and ecology of natural enemies
of coconut mite in regions in the Americas that have not been explored, and conduct ex-
perimental releases in Africa and Sri Lanka of one known or newly identified natural ene-
my and simultaneously determining with molecular tools and cross-breeding experi-
ments whether Brazilian populations of predator species associated with coconut mite are
8
biologically similar to conspecifics found in Africa and Sri Lanka. The searches will be
to understand interspecific interactions among co-occurring natural enemy species and
their impact on coconut mite. Experiments will also help in understanding plant factors
that affect the susceptibility of coconut mite to predation and predator dispersal, with the
aim of designing interventions that could enhance biological control. This study will in-
clude stakeholder surveys while production and marketing data will be used in socioeco-
nomic analyses to determine the effect of biological control interventions on peoples’ li-
velihoods. The stakeholders include producers, consumers, suppliers, vendors/marketers
and policy makers in each target country. The baseline survey will set the benchmark for
assessing the effects of biological control. The program is likely to contribute substan-
tially to our fundamental understanding of the factors that affect the success of biological
control – of one of the most challenging pests - while simultaneously improving liveli-
hoods of people who depend on coconut
The present study is therefore an attempt to conduct stakeholder analysis to determine

their perceptions on the performance of coconut sub-sector and constraints facing the
industry, particularly focusing on the impact of attacks by mites on the coconut yields and
survival. Informal and formal interviews with stakeholders will help understand their
perception on the effects of the mite attacks in their livelihoods. The data on income
distribution will be used to assess the impacts of the biological control on gender equity.
In the baseline survey, fresh coconut value chain analysis will be carried out. The
farmers, merchants and consumers will be surveyed to get their views on the production
and marketing of the coconut. The study will further undertake a benefit/cost analysis of
controlling the mites in order to improve the performance of the sub-sector and its
contribution to poverty reduction. The livelihoods of more than 15 million people in
Benin, Siri Lanka and Tanzania are at stake if the mite is not controlled. Hence seeking
to understand the mite’s fauna and migratory pattern is an important step towards finding
cost effective control mechanism. The study will also determine consumer willingness to
pay for products produced under biological control of coconut mites. The consumer
preference study is important due to increased concern on environmental and health
9
issues related to food products. Thus the study will pursue the following specific
objectives;
1.2 Objectives
(i) To assess the perception of the stakeholders (farmers, customers, merchants)

regarding the performance (constraints and opportunities) for coconut value
chain.
(ii) To establish indicators and benchmark for assessing the impacts of biological
control method
(iii) To take inventory of various coconut based cropping systems and characterize
and rank them according to economic performance.
(iv) To compare cost and benefit of biological control of coconut mite to those of
other pest control methods.
(v) To determine the contribution of biological control of coconut mites (other
pests) to food security, gender equity and income.
(vi) To determine consumers’ relative preference for coconut products produced
under biological control of coconut mite and those produced with pesticide.
1.3 Research Questions/ Hypotheses
On the basis of the specific objectives one and three, the following research questions
will have to be answered;
i) What are the constraints and opportunities in the coconut value chain?
ii) What are existing coconut cropping systems?
iii) What are the characteristics of each coconut cropping systems?
On the basis of the specific objectives four, five and six hypotheses will be tested as
follows
(i) The first null hypothesis specifies that biological control of coconut mite is
less profitable than other pest control methods
10
-The alternative hypothesis specifies that biological control of coconut mite is
more profitable than pest control methods
(ii) There second null hypothesis specifies that there is no significant contribution
of biological control of coconut mite to food security, gender equity and
income of the coconut producers.
-The alternative hypothesis specifies that the biological control of coconut
mite method has a significant contribution to food security, gender equity and
income.
(iii) The null hypothesis specifies that consumers prefer coconut products produced
through biological control of coconut mite to those products produced using
pesticides.
-Alternate hypothesis specifies that consumers prefer coconut products
produced using pesticides to those produced through biological control of
coconut mite
2.0. Research Methodology

2.1. Study Areas
The study will cover different geographic regions where the mite is currently reported,
including several of the main coconut production regions in the Asia (Sri Lanka) and
Africa (Tanzania and Benin Republic in West Africa).
2.2. Sampling Strategy

In this study, first, baseline study will carried out in the three selected countries. The sur-
vey will be carried to obtain the baseline information that will be used to assess the im-
pacts of the introduction of biological control of coconut mites in the livelihood of grow-
ing farmers. The importance of coconut production in the areas is the basis for considera-
tion for sampling approach in this survey. Discussions will be held with the research in-
stitutes in the respective countries to purposively obtain the sub-countries and villages
where coconut is important. With the help of local extension staff, a list of wards/sub-
11
countries and villages will be developed for all of the villages highly producing coconut.
All the villages will be put together and 15 will randomly be selected. The list of house-
holds will be obtained from village register books and 450 households will comprise a
sample for all three countries. A survey will also include 90 randomly selected coconut
wholesalers and 90 retailers from purposively selected buying points (Local market/Mar-
ket centers). The list of both wholesalers and retailers will be obtained from market center
authorities. Coconut consumer intercept survey will be carried out in the market centers.
A systematic sampling will be employed to get 150 coconut consumers in the three
countries. Information regarding coconut processor will be obtained from records main-
tained by coconut research institutes in the targeted countries. From a list prepared,
90 coconut processors will be involved in this study.
Secondly, the consumer intercept survey will be carried out in the third
year of the study to determine the consumer willingness to pay for
coconut products produced under biological control of coconut mite.
Following field tests of the survey instrument, consumers will be ap-
proached at direct-sale outlets such as farmers’ markets, roadside pro-
duce stands and malls. A systematic sampling will be employed in
which 210 from randomly selected respondents will constitute a
sample in all the selected countries.
In the third and fourth year of the study, cost and benefit analysis of
the biological control of coconut mite and the impact studies will be
done respectively. The sampling approach described above for baseline
survey will be adopted.
2.3. Data Collection Methods

Informal group interviews and key informant surveys will be organized for producers,
consumers, suppliers, vendors/marketers and policy makers in each target country. Using
structured questionnaires, information collected will include socio-demographic and
economic characteristics of farms and communities involved; coconut production
12
technologies and practices available and used by producers; current and potential impact
of coconut on income; and trends in coconut production and income distribution. Other
information will include new crop protection practices and mainly data relative to
biological control and related yield and improved quality (oil, copra, etc) and coconut
cropping system. Fresh coconut value chain analysis will be carried out for producers,
wholesalers, retailers and processors. The study will assess the cost and benefit of the
biological control and other new techniques and return on investment in biological
control through increased production and improved quality of coconut as a result of
biological control of coconut mite. Assessment of consumer preferences will be carried-
out for consumers’ willingness to pay for coconut products produced under biological
control of coconut mite and those produced with chemical pesticide.
2.4. Questionnaire Pre-testing

For a baseline survey, the pre-testing of questionnaires will involve coconut farmers,
coconut wholesalers and retailers, consumers and processors. The pre-testing of
questionnaire will be done by interviewing 20 coconut farmers in Mkuranga, District,
Tanzania while pre-testing of questionnaires for coconut wholesalers and retailers,
consumers and processors will be done by interviewing 10 respondents each. The pre-
testing will be done in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. Necessary corrections will be made to
the questionnaires before data collection. The pre-testing of questionnaire for cost-
benefit, consumers’ preference and impacts studies will be planned after the baseline
study is complete in the second third and fourth years of the study.
2.5. Data analysis

Responses from the interview will be coded and summarized using excel. The descriptive
analyses will involve computation of statistical means, standard deviations, graphs and
frequency distribution. Quantitative analyses will be performed using Statistical Package
for Social Sciences (SPSS for Window, 12.5). Cross-tabulations involving Chi-Square
tests will also be employed in testing association between variables. A logit regression
model will be estimated to assess the effects of socio-economic variables on the
13
dependent variables. Estimation of parameter in the models (MLE) will be performed
using econometric soft ware LIMDEP (Green, 2002).
2.5.1. Analysis of Coconut Value Chain

Estimates of marketing margins and marketing efficiency will be obtained using the
formula given by Kohls, (1985). According to Kohls (1985), marketing margin equals the
difference between what the consumer pays and the farm gate price per unit of the
coconut produce. Based on this formula and on the assumption that wholesalers buy
directly from the farmers, while the retailers buy directly from the wholesalers, it then
follows that wholesalers’ margin equals wholesalers’ selling price per unit minus farmers’
selling price per unit. Also, retailers’ margin equals retailers’ selling price per unit minus
wholesalers’ selling price per unit. The net margin accruing to the wholesaler or the
retailer is the difference between the market margin and the marketing costs. Marketing
cost is the sum of transport cost, storage cost, labour cost and other costs. Marketing
efficiency is then calculated using the formula given by Olukosi and Isitor (1990). The
formula is as specified below;
ValueAddedbyMarketingActivities * 100%
MarketingEfficiency = .....................................(1)
MarketingCost
In other words,
NetM arg in * 100
MarketingEfficiency = ............................................................................(2)
Marketig cos t
To calculate market margin and market efficiency, the average prices of coconut is used
as given by the respondents in the various markets. Marketing Margin analysis can be
represented as
MM = Pi − Pi −1 .....................................................................................................................(3)
Where;
MM = Marketing Margin between market level i and market level i – 1.
Pi = Price at market level i
Pi -1 = Price at market level i -1
Margin percentage is expressed on the basis of buying price. That is
P − Pi −1
MM = i X 100.................................................................................................(4)
Pi −1
14
2.5.2. Gross Margin Analysis
Gross margin is the difference between total revenue of coconut and the variable cost
attributed to it as shown in equation (5) below.
GM = TR − TVC...............................................................................................................(5)
Where;
GM = Average Gross margin (US$/ha)
TR = Average total Revenue (US$/ha)
TVC = Average Total Variable costs (US$/ha).
Thus we can estimate producer share as described in the next section
2.5.3. Producer Share

This the ratio of producer price to consumer price (retail price) depending on the level of
marketing chain. It will be calculated by;
Px MM
Ps = = 1− ............................................................................................................(6)
Pr Pr
Where:
Ps =Producers’ share
Px =Producers Price
Pr =Retail Price
MM=Market Margin
2.5. 4. Cost and Benefit Analysis

In this study of potential cost and benefit of biological control of coconut mite control,
primary data will be gathered through structured questionnaire while secondary data will
be extracted from project reports. This analysis will focus on valuing crop damage in
terms of quantity and quality resulting from varying levels of pest infestation (yield
responses to insect damage), the efficacy of biological control agents at different levels of
infestation, the resource requirements of the biological control method such as labor and
equipment for application (egg cards, distribution boxes, etc.), the quantity of biological
control agents, and the labor required to determine the need for field monitoring, the
effects in subsequent time periods on infestation, yield and other pest controls needed, the
15
interactive relationships among biological control agents and factors such as soil fertility,
crop varieties and weather.
Other data needed will include the prices of product and inputs used in the production of
the crop. Since coconut is in competition with other enterprises on the farm, costs and re-
turns associated with the competitive crops are also needed. The cost-benefit ratios are
based on a brief but comprehensive survey of data sources, but nevertheless are approx-
imations within ranged values. Because of the permanent nature of biological control, the
net benefits (Π) [i.e., benefit (B) - costs (C)] corrected for the present value of money us-
ing the discount rate (1+α)-1 accrue over t years (i = 1... t) will be given as.
Π 1t =1 =
∑ (B i − Ci )
............................................................................................................(6)
(1 + α ) i
Where;
∑ = Summation sign
α = Interest rate of price of money.
Gross revenue (B) to the coconut production is given as
Bi = Pi (Yi − DN (1 − E ))....................................................................................................(7)
Where;
P= Price of output,
Y= Maximum possible yield
D =Damage rate per pest
N and E are the efficacy of the biological control
In reality, D is a function of N (i.e., D (N (1-E))), but for simplicity we assume that D is

a constant. In fact, the benefit of biological control for the ith year is B i = PDNiE, and in
the extreme may equal PY.
In evaluating the effectiveness of chemical control or biological release of natural en-

emies, the balance of revenues (B(X)) = the value of the increase in yield attributable to
using X units of the control measure (e.g., pesticide or biological control) minus the out-
of-pocket cost (C(X)) of causing X units of the control measure. Only infrequently are
16
the social costs (S(X)) associated with the control measure included. For and biological
control, S(X) is usually zero. The benefit function is usually assumed to be concave from
below and the cost per unit of X constant. The net benefit (II) function is thus given as.
Π = B ( X ) − C ( X )...............................................................................................................(8)
Thus the optimal solution to this function occurs when

dB dC
= .............................................................................................................................(9)
dX dX
It is important to note that the social or external costs of pesticides in terms of pollution,
health and environmental effects are seldom included in the grower's calculations because
there is no economic incentive to do so.
With naturally occurring biological control and economically viable classical biological
control (BC), the costs of other pest control tactics and social costs often become zero,
and the whole of society obtains the maximum benefits, the natural and biological con-
trols supplant other methods of control and are assumed to solve the problem perman-
ently. In such cases biological control should be favored as the equation for profit be-
comes;
B( BC ) − C ( BC ) > B ( X ) − C ( BC ) > B( X )......................................................................(10)

2.5.5. Consumers’ Willingness to Pay (WTP)
The purpose of this analysis is to ascertain first consumers’ willingness to pay for selec-
ted coconut products and how the demographics may influence willingness to pay for
coconut products produced under biological control of coconut mite. The specific
products to be examined will include………………..
Respondents will be presented with label that would appear on or near the products. The
label indicates whether the product has been made of coconut produced under biological
control of coconut mite or pesticides. Then the respondents will be asked a question re-
garding their opinion of willingness to pay for products produced under biological control
of coconut mites. Respondents can answer that they “support biological control and
17
would pay a higher price for product under biological control”, “support biological con-
trol of coconut mites but not if it requires paying a higher price for derivative product ”,
or “do not support biological control products regardless of whether it costs me
anything”. Those responding that they would pay more for biological control products
will be then asked a series of questions regarding pricing of specific products. Prior to
this series of questions, the respondents will be presented with a reminder that this is a
hypothetical situation and of their ability to pay for the products.
Two pictures of coconut products (to be determined) will then be presented to the re-
spondents. The respondents will be reminded that these are simply examples of coconut
products, and they might wish to purchase a product of a different style, color, or type of
coconut. In the case of each product, two identical pictures will be shown so that the two
products are identical in all attributes except for sources. Dimensions for each product
will also be provided, as will the price for the coconut products produced under pesticide
control. These prices will be based on prices for representative products in the local mar-
ket area. Respondents are then asked how much more they would be willing to pay for a
product that was produced under biological control. Demographic questions will con-
clude the survey.
Willingness-to-pay measurements are grounded in utility theory. Hanemann (1991) out-

lines the theoretical underpinnings as a utility maximization problem subject to a budget
constraint. The consumer chooses the level of the good X that maximizes utility, produ-
cing the traditional Marshallian demand curve X (p, y, q), where p is market price, y is in-
come and q, is the quality of the good, fixed exogenously. The resulting indirect utility
function is V (p, y, q). Identifying a change in a good’s quality from q 0 to q1, the measure-
ment of value is
V ( p, y − WTP, q1 ) = V ( p, y, q o ).........................................................................................(11)
Where WTP is the amount the consumer would be willing to pay for the improved qual-
ity, maintaining constant utility. The estimate is shown more directly using the dual prob-
lem: expenditure minimization constrained by a given utility level (Lusk 2004). The dual
18
produces the Hicksian demand curve X (p, U, q) and indirect expenditure function M (p,
U, q) so that
(WTP = M ( p, U , q o ) − M ( p, Uq1 )..........................................................................................(12)

Where U is a constant utility level
The random utility model (RUM) is used to analyze choices and estimate WTP. When re-
spondents are asked to make a choice of whether or not to pay a given dollar amount, a
positive response is interpreted as their WTP. In order to find the central tendency of
WTP from a sample, the positive responses are fitted to a probability function. This is
modeled as the probability that the utility derived from the good associated with that
choice is greater than the alternative,
P[ (V1 + ε 1 ) > (Vo + ε o )].....................................................................................................(13)
orP[ (ε 1 − ε o ) < (V1 − Vo )]...................................................................................................(14)
Where V is the indirect utility and ε is the error term.
Estimates of WTP are based on the mid-point of this function, i.e. the point at which the
probability of a positive response is 0.5. The most basic version of this model includes
only the socioeconomic attributes of respondents as variables.
[ ]
P { ε 1 ( S ) − ε 2 ( S )} < (V1 ( S ) − V 2 ( S ) } .............................................................................(15)
This is the model used in contingent valuation choice analysis. Lancaster (1966) builds
the conceptual framework for conjoint analysis by clarifying that utility is gained from
the characteristics of a good rather than the good itself. Characteristics are objective qual-
ities of a good while attributes, on the other hand, are what the characteristics represent,
and are the real source of an individual’s utility. Lancaster maintained that utility should
be a function of characteristics rather than attributes as the former are measurable, so that,
u = U (t1 , t 2 , t 3 )................................................................................................................(16)
t = BX .............................................................................................................................(17)
19
Where t represents the characteristics of a good X, based on the consumption technology
matrix B (i.e. the amounts of each characteristic which are predetermined in each good).
Louviere, Hensher and Swait (2000) further refine these distinctions, making utility a
function of consumption services. Each characteristic of a good is associated with a con-
sumption service which it provides. Moreover, they suggest that utility maximization is
based on expected services of a good because consumers do not have complete informa-
tion. In practice, the model forces a one-to-one correlation between services and charac-
teristics. However, these theoretical distinctions are helpful in conceptualizing character-
istics as signals that communicate value. Conjoint analysis proceeds with a good that is
decomposed according to the Lancastrian model and measures its part-worth values is
shown below.
[ ]
Pr obij = P (Vij + ε ij ) > (Via + ε ia ; a = 1,2.... j , a ≠ j ..........................................................(18)
[ ]
orP (ε ij − ε ia ) < (Vij − Vij ) ................................................................................................(19)
Where Vij denotes the individual’s indirect utility from choosing product j and εij is an
error term.
The part worth utility is represented in the following relationship
Vij = βX i + δPi + ε ij .......................................................................................................(20)
Where Vij denotes the individual’s indirect utility from choosing product j; xj is a vector
of product attributes level j’s; pj is price for product j; β is a conformable vector of coef-
ficients and δ is a conformable coefficient to be estimated; and εij is an error term.
This simple additive linear function produces the main effects of our model. These effects
indicate how utility is affected by the level of the attribute when it is isolated from all oth-
er attributes. Higher order effects indicate whether utility is also affected when two attrib-
utes are presented in tandem (Louviere, et al 2000). We incorporate combinations of at-
tributes by interacting product attribute levels, so that,
Vij = βX i + δPi + χC ij + ε ij ...............................................................................................(21)

Where cij is a vector of combination effects from product attribute level i's interacted
with product attribute level j's; and χ is a conformable vector of coefficients to be estim-
ated.
20
The final dimension to our model is that of preference variation among the population. In
order to account for different preferences among various sub-populations we incorporate
socioeconomic characteristics through interaction terms with the attribute level variables,
so that,
Vij = αS ij + βX i + δPi + χC ij + ε ij ...........................................................................................(22)

Where Sij is a vector of socioeconomic variables i’s interacted with product attribute level
j’s; and α is a conformable vector of coefficients to be estimated. Now that we have the
utility function defined, we can model the choice as the relative differences in utility. The
difference between product A and product B for individual i is,
dVij = α∆S ij + β ∆X i + δ∆Pi + χ∆C ij + ε ij ..............................................................................( 23)
Where dViAB = the utility difference between product A product B. Thus the model
above can be represented.
Y = β i − β 2 ∆ Pr ice + β 3 ∆Labeled + β 4 Local + β 5 ∆EnviromentalFriendly

+ β 6 ∆PesticideFree + β 7 ∆Health + / − β 8 ∆Nationality * ∆Age
+ β 9 ∆Gender * ∆Local + ε ij ............................................................................................(24)
The signs on parameters indicate the hypothesized relationship. The parameters are es-
timated with the maximum likelihood procedure for a binary probit model with the Lim-
dep statistical package.
2.5.6. Household Food Security
Food security indicators such food stock and number of meals eaten daily within a house-
hold will be summarized. The Pearson Correlation Coefficient will then be applied to de-
termine the relationship between coconut production indicators and food security indicat-
ors.
Using the food balance sheet model, the total food available to the household for con-
sumption will be estimated as follows:
21
Total food available for household consumption =[Total food produced] + [Total food
purchased and food donations]-[Total food sold, wasted and given out as food losses].
That is;
Fy = ( Fo + F p + Fd ) − ( Fs + Ft ) , at time t = a year…………………………………. (25)
Where;
Fy is total food available for household consumption
Fo is total food output (Produced)
Fp is total food purchase
Fd is total food donations
Fs is total food sold out
Ft is total depleted food (food wasted)
The household food available for consumption is commonly believed to be dependent of

the household factors of production such as land household food expenditure as well as
household characteristics and socio-economic characteristics, access to market, credit,
land, size, extension services, livestock diversity, education, household size and age. This
relationship will be shown as;
Y = ( P f , H ex )..................................................................................................................(26)
Where;
Y represents household food availability for consumptions measured in calories
Pf represents household factors of production such as land
Hex represents household food expenditure.
Thus the equation for estimation will be as written below;
Y = ( Pf H ex X 1 , X 2 , X 3 , X 4 , X 5 ).................................................................................(27)
Where;
X1-X5 = socio-economic factors while other variables are as previously defined
2.6. Budget and Source of Funds

The baseline survey is estimated to cost 26477 USD (see appendix 7 for detail). The
budget for cost-benefit, consumer preference and impact studies is estimate to be 26500
USD. A total of 52977 USD will be requested from the University of Amsterdam (the
Netherlands) in collaboration with IITA to finance the study.
22
Reference
Aquino, M.L.N. & Arruda, G.P. (1967) O agente causal da ‘necrose do olho do coqueiro’
em Pernambuco. 33 pp. Recife, IPA.
Birungi, J. & Munstermann, L.E. (2002) Genetic structure of Aedes albopictus (Diptera:
Culicidae) populations based on mitochondrial ND5 sequences: evidence for an
independent invasion into Brazil and United States. Genetics 95, 125–132.
Child, R. 1974. Coconuts. 2nd Edition. Longmans, Green and Co., London 335 p.
Coconut Industry Board, Jamaica, West Indies. 1973. 13th Report of the Research
Department July 1972 - June 973. Report of the Research Department. Coconut
Industry Board (Jamaica) 63p.
CIMMYT, 1988. From Agronomic data to farmer recommendation. Mexico D F.
Green, W.H. (2002). Limdep Version 8.0: Econometric Modeling Guide. Econometric
Software, Inc, Plainview, New York. Pp201
23
Howard, F.W., and E. Abreu Rodriguez. and Denmark, H.A. 1990. Geographical and
seasonal distribution of the coconut mite, A. guerreronis (Acari: Eriophyidae), Puerto
Rico and Florida, USA. J. Agric. Univ. P.R. 74:237-251
Howard, F.W., and E. Abreu-Rodriguez. 1991. Tightness of the perianth of coconuts in
relation to infestation by coconut mites. Fl. Entomol. 74:358-361.
Keifer, H.H., E.W. Baker, T. Kono, M. Delfinado, and W.E. Styer. 1982. An illustrated
guide to plant abnormalities caused by eriophyid mites in North America. U.S.D.A.
Agric. Res. Services. Agriculture Handbook No. 573:5-121.
Maddala, G. S., 1983. Limited-dependent and qualitative variables in econometrics.
Cambridge. University press. New York.
Moore, D. 1986. Bract arrangement in the coconut fruit in relation to attack by the
Coconut Mite E. guerreronis Keifer. Trop. Agric. 63:285-288
Moore, D., and L. Alexander. 1987. Aspects of migration and colonization of the coconut
palm by the coconut mite, E. guerreronis (Keifer) (Acari: Eriophyidae). Bull. Ent.
Res. 77:641-50.
Moore, D., and L. Alexander. 1990. Resistance of coconuts in St. Lucia to attack by the
coconut mite E. guerreronis Keifer. Trop. Agric. 67:33-36.
Moore, D., L. Alexander, and R.A. Hall. 1989. The coconut mite, E. guerreronis Keifer in
St. Lucia: yield losses and attempt to control it with acaricide, polybutene and
Hirsutella fungus. Trop. Pest Manag. 35:83-89.
Moore, D., M.S. Ridout, and L. Alexander. 1991. Nutrition of coconuts in St. Lucia and
relationship with attack by coconut mite. A. guerreronis Keifer. Trop. Agric. 68:41-
44.
Persley, G.J. 1992. Replanting the tree of life: Towards an international agenda for
coconut palm research. Redwood Press Ltd. Melksham 156 p.
Theil H., (1979)., Principles of Econometrics. Centre for Mathematical Studies and
Economics. The University of Chicago. John Wiley & Sons New York.
Woodroof, J.G. 1970. Coconuts: Production, processing, products. The AVI Publishing
Co.Inc. 241p.
Briones, M.L. & Sill, Jr W.H. (1963) Habitat, gross morphology and geographical
distribution of four new species of eriophyid mites from coconuts in the Philippines.
FAO Plant Protection Bulletin 11, 25–30.
Crooks, J.A. & Soule, M. (1999) Lag times in population explosions of invasive species:
causes and implications. pp. 103–125 in Sandlund, O., Schei, P. & Viken, A. (Eds)
Invasive species and biodiversity management. Dordrecht, The Netherlands, Kluwer.
Davies, N., Villablanca, F.X. & Roderick, G.K. (1999) Bioinvasions of the medfly
Ceratitis capitata: source estimation using DNA sequences at multiple intron loci.
Genetics 153, 351–360.
Elton, C. (1958) The ecology of invasions by animals and plants. 181 pp. London,
Chapman and Hall.
Kohls, R.L (1985): Marketing of Agricultural Products. Macmillan Publishers, New
York, pp 83.
Olukosi, J.O and Isitor, S.V (1990): Introduction to Agricultural Market and Price;
Principles and Applications. Agitab Publishers, Zaria. Pp 34.
24
25
Stakeholders’ Survey (farmers, customers, merchants) regarding the Performance (constraints and opportunities) for Coconut
Value Chain; Baseline Study in Tanzania, Benin and Sri-Lanka
Appendix 1: Farmer’s questionnaire
PART A: RESPONDENTS DETAILS

A1 Name of interviewer
A2 Name of respondent
A3 Name of head of household
A4 Country name
A5 Region/Sub-country name
A6 District name
A7 Village name
Way point number
GPS READING N/S
E/S
Attitude (Meters)
(Note to interviewer: A household consist of all people who live under the same roof, eat from the same pot and share expenditures. A
person is not considered as a member if she spent more than 3 month away in the past 12months)
PART B: SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC AND ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS

B1. Household socio-demographic characteristics
ID Name of Sex Age Relationship Formal Off school Working Working Major
household 1=Male (In with household schooling training on the off-farm livelihood
member 2=Female years head 1=Attended 1=None farm 1=Yes occupation
except 1=Head before 2=Vocational 1=Full 2=No
months 2=Spouse 2=Attending training time
for 3=Son/Daughter now 3= Short term 2=Part
infants 4=Relative 3=Never training on time
26
i.e. <1 5=Un-related attended best
year) 4=Too agriculture
young to practice (non-
attend extension
services)
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
11
12
13
14
15
Major occupation: 0=None, 1=Crop production, 2=Livestock keeping, 3=Business, 4=Salaried employment, 5= Wage work,
6=Technician, 7=Artisan/handcraft, 8=Natural resources (wood, charcoal etc), 9=Traditional healing/medicine, 10=Rent income, 11=
Others (Specify)
PART C: LAND USE AND TENURE

C1: Please provide the information on land use and tenure.
Land tenure Size (Acres) Size of land (Acres) under different land uses
structure Coconut Other perennial Annual crops Grazing Fallow
crops land
Private (titled) land
27
Land with use right
only
Share cropped land
Borrowed land
Rented
D: PRODUCTIVE ASSETS
D1: Please provide information on the following key productive assets
Asset Number Working status Total value (Total value if
owned 1=It is/are most of the working properly liquidated)
2=It is one/most of them working moderately, It is/most
of them working properly
Hand hoe
Machete
Axe
Ox-plough, weeder, riper etc
Ox-cart
Wheel barrow
Oxen
Donkeys
Horses
Sprayer
Watering cane
Irrigation pump
Tractor
Pick-up, Lorry etc
Others (Specify)
28
E.FARM SIZE AND LABOUR
E1.Please provide the information on the crops cultivated and the farm size in the years 2008
SN Crop Area under cultivation (acre) Area under fallow/grazing (acre)
E2. What is the labour input used in the first season in 2008
SN Land preparation Planting Fertilizer/chemic Weeding Harvest Storage
al application ing and (Shelling +
transpo storage
rting equipments
Crop Land Family Hired Family Hired Family Hired Family Hired Family Hired Famil
rent labour* labour labour labour labour labour labour labour labour labour y
cost cost cost cost cost cost cost cost cost cost cost labou
r cost
29
Family Labour: People (A.E)*Effective days*Effective Hours
A.E=Equivalents (1 Adult = A person of 15 and above of years of age; A child of 10-14 years of age will be equated to 0.5 of an adult
equivalent)
F: INCOME
F1. Please provide the information on the income from the following crop sources in last three years
Category Income in $/Local currency
2006/7 2007/8 2008/9
Quantity Price/unit Amount Quantity Price/unit Amount Quantity Price/unit Amount
Coconut
Other crops (specify)
30
F2. Please provide the information on the income from the following non-crop sources
Non-crop income sources 2006 2007 2008

Quantity Amount Quantity Amount Quantity Amount
($/local ($/local ($/local
currency) currency) currency)
Livestock
Beekeeping
Fishing
Charcoal making
Petty trade
Weaving/pottery
Blacksmith (e.g. bicycle repair etc)
Labour selling (casual)
Formal employment
Remittances from relatives
Credit (formal and informal)
Others (specify)……………………………………………
………..
F3. Did you borrow money in the last five years? ……… YES=1 (go to F4) NO=2
F4. If yes from above, please fill the Table below.
31
Source Year Amount Reasons for borrowing Interest rate
borrowed borrowed
G: COCONUT PRODUCTION TREND1

G1. Please provide the information on the following: principal crops, area, production and productivity for last three seasons
S/N 2006/7 2007/8 2008/9

Principal Area Production (in Production (in Area Production (in Productivity Area Production (in Productivity
Crops (in tones) tones) (in tones) (in tones)
1. (kg/ha) (kg/ha)
ha) (1ton=1000kg (1ton=1000kg ha) (1ton=1000kg ha) (1ton=1000kg
) ) ) )
2. Coconut
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
G2: Has the production of coconut in your farm

1=Increased
2=Remained the same
1
Data on coconut production trends to be supplemented with secondary data from reports
32
3=Decreased
G3: Please report the coconut production for your farm as follows:
Item 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Acreage harves-
ted
Yield
(Copra/…)
G4: Please indicate the reasons for the answer in G2 above.

1=……………………………………………………………
2=……………………………………………………………
3=……………………………………………………………
4=……………………………………………………………
5=…………………………………………………………..
33
H: MITES EXTENT AND SEVERITY, AND CROP PROTECTION PRACTICES
H1. What are the most important coconut production and post-harvest constraints?
Production constraints A constraint? If yes, what is the level If yes what is the level If yes to coconut mite,
1=Yes of severity of severity compared to which year did it start to
2=No 1=Highly sever other constraints be a major constraint in
2=Severe ( Comparative ranking, your farm
3=Less severe 1st being most severe)
Coconut mite
Lethal disease
H2. Do you consider coconut mite a problem in you farm? 1=Yes, 2=No
H2. If yes, do you think coconut mite cause any loses in your farm? 1= Yes, 2=No
H3. Please report the losses due coconut mite in the in the last five years
Year Size of nuts* Average nuts per palm Average production
2004
2005
2006
2007
34
2008
2009
*Code for size: 1=Large, 2=Medium, 3=Small
H4. What are the extent of and severity and coconut mite problem in your farm?
Plot (SN) Acreage Proportion of land infected by coconut mite (%) Perceived level of severity (impact on coconut
production)
Codes; 1=more severe, 2=severe, 3=less severe,
4=not yet a problem
Now Five years ago Control 1st season Five years ago
measures used 2008 (most
recent)
Codes for coconut control: 1=Biological control, 2=Pesticides, 3=Using resistant varieties, 4=Others (Specify)………..
H6. Which of the following coconut mite control technologies are you aware of and what is your current use status? If you are
currently using coconut mite control method what is the associated yield of coconut?
Technology Coconut mite Aware of the If aware, current use When did you Since when If you are aware
ID control technology? status know the did you start from whom did you
1=Yes 1=Currently using existence of this to use it for receive
2=No 2=Abandoned technology? the first time? information?*
3=Never adopted (Year)
4=No coconut mite on
the farm
35
Codes for source of information: 1=Farmers in the village; 2=Mass media (Radio, New papers etc), 3=Extension workers, 4=Local
NGO, Research institutes, 5=Farmers’ Community Based Organization (CBOs), 6=others (Specify)
H7. If you aware of any coconut mite control technology but have not adopted any, what are the most important reasons for non-
adoption? (Multiple answers possible)
S/N Reasons for no-adoption Reason status Ranking (1st being the most
important)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
H8. If you aware of any coconut mite control technology in H4 how would you rank various coconut mite control technologies you
have been introduced to?
Technology Coconut mite Ranked based on
ID control
technology
Yield enhancing Technical Labor demand reason 4
1=Most yield simplicity (Least demanding
36
enhancing (Simplicity to to the most
2=Moderately yield most complex) demanding)
enhancing 1=Simplest 1=Least
3=Last yield 2=Simpler demanding
enhancing 3=Complex 2=Moderately
demanding
3=Most
demanding
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
I.FOOD SECURITY
I1. What is the household’s main source of income? 1= Animal & animal product sales 2= Crop sales (go to J2)
3= Trade 4= Casual labour 5= Salaried/wage employment 6= Remittances/gifts 7= Others, specify
J2.What is the main crops that contribute to the main source of income? Select up to four responses from the right hand column and
rank them in order of first, second, third choice.
1--------------first choice a. Maize
2---------------second choice b. Coconut
3---------------third choice c. Paddy
4---------------fourth choice d. Cassava
e. Fruits
f. Others (Specify)
I3. What portion of income is contributed by coconut?
37
I4. How do you distribute the income from coconut? Please rank them in order of importance.
1--------------first choice a. Food
2---------------second choice b. Education
3---------------third choice c. Health
4---------------fourth choice d. Shelter (e.g. house construction etc,)
e. Others (Specify)
I5. About coconut and food security

1 Do you buy food items after selling coconut? 1=Yes, 2=No
2 To what extent does coconut contribute to the food security in your household? 1= Not all, 2=Very Little, 3=Some what,
4=Very much
I6. These next questions are about the food eaten in your household in the last 12 months and whether you were able to afford
the food you need
1 In the last 12 months, since last {DISPLAY CURRENT MONTH}, did {you/you or 1=YES, 2= NO , 3=REFUSED,
other adults in your household} ever cut the size of your meals or skip meals because 4=DON’T KNOW
there wasn't enough money for food?
2 How often did this happen? 1=almost every month

2=some months but not every month, or
in only 1 or 2 months?
3=REFUSED
4=DON'T KNOW
3 In the last 12 months, did you ever eat less than you felt you should because there 1=YES
wasn't enough money to buy food? 2= NO
3=REFUSED
4=DON’T KNOW
4 [In the last 12 months], were you ever hungry but didn't eat because you couldn't 1=YES
afford enough food? 2= NO
38
3=REFUSED
4=DON’T KNOW
I7. Food consumption and dietary Diversity

Twenty four recall for food consumption in the households: The interviewer should establish whether the previous day and night was
usual or normal for the household. If unusual-feast, funeral or most members absent, then another day should selected.
Food groups consumed: What food groups did members Did a member of your Codes*:
of the households consumed in the past 24 hours (from this household consume food from 1=Own production
time yesterday to now)? Include any snacks consumed any of these food groups in the 2=Purchase
last 24 hours? 3=Gift from friends
1=Yes 4=Food aid
2=No 5=Bartered
6=Borrowed
7=Gathered/wild
8=Others (Specified)
9=N/A
Type of food What is the main source of the dominant
food item consumed (use the above codes)?
1. Cereal and cereal products (e.g. maize, rice and bread)?
2. Milk and milk products (e.g. goat/camel/fermented milk,
milk powder)?
3. Sugar and honey?
4. Oil/ fats (cooking fat or oil, butter, ghee, margarine)?
5. Meat, poultry (Goat/camel meat, beef, chicken or their
products)?
6. Pulses/legumes, nuts (e.g. beans, lentils, green grams,
cowpeas; peanut)?
39
7. Roots and tubers (e.g. potatoes, arrowroot)?
8. Vegetables (e.g. green or leafy vegetables, tomatoes,
carrots, onions)?
9. Fruits (e.g. water melons, mangoes, grapes, bananas,
lemon)?
10. Eggs?
11. Fish and sea foods (e.g. fried/boiled/roasted fish,
lobsters)?
12. Miscellaneous (e.g. spices, chocolates, sweets,
beverages, etc)?
I8. In general what is the main source of staple food in the household? (*Use codes in I5 above) _________________
I9. Total number of food groups consumed in the household: ____________________
I10. How many meals2 has the household had in the last 24 hours (from this time yesterday to now)? 1= One 2=Two 3= Three
J. GENDER RELATIONS
J1. Who in the household makes decision to sell and give away coconut/coconut products?
Products Man Women Joint Children Others (Specify)
Coconut
Coconut water
Roofing/Thatching
materials
Coconut husk
Others (Specify)
J2. Who in the household makes decision to use benefit of coconut in kind or money?
Products Man Women Joint Children Others (Specify)
2
A meal refers to food served and eaten at one time (excluding snacks) and includes one of the three commonly known: - breakfast, lunch and supper/dinner
40
Coconut
Coconut water
Roofing/Thatching
materials
Coconut husk
Others (Specify)
K. COCONUT UTILIZATION
K1. Do you grow coconut for the following use? Code 1=Yes, 2=No
1. Coconut water
2. Roofing (Coconut fronds)
3. Coconut oil
4. Fuel wood
5. Palm wine
6. Others (Specify)
K2. Rank the following coconut use according to the importance of growing coconut
1--------------first choice a. Part of diet

2---------------second choice b. coconut
3---------------third choice c. Roofing
4---------------fourth choice d. Oil processing
f. Others (Specify)
41
Please estimate the quantity of coconut you have allocated to the different uses on a monthly basis;
Utilization Model During the season Off-season
Sell neighbors
Consume at home
Send to commodity market
Send to auction
Remain unsold
Given as gift
Others (Specify)
L.COCNUT PROCESSING
1 Do you process coconut to any form? 1=Yes (go to...)

2=No (go to...)
2 What is/are the product(s) you produce from raw coconut? -------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------
3 What are the methods/equipments you use in processing coconut? --------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------
4 What are the facilities you use in storing coconut products? --------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------
5 What are the reasons for not processing the crop produce? 1=Expensive, 2=Time consuming, 3=Lack of
Rank technology, 4=No market for products, 5=Other
42
----------- problems ( Specify)--------
-----------
-----------
-----------
-----------
-----------
6 What are the constraints in processing coconut? 1=Marketing, 2=Capital/credit availability,
3=Equipment & installations, 4=Product quality
Rank training, 5=Product price stabilization, 6=Lack of
----------- policies, 7= Others ( Specify)
-----------
-----------
-----------
-----------
-----------
M. COCONUT MARKETING
M1.These next questions are the marketing of coconut the last 12 months
1 When did you record your highest / lowest Limit Month/Season Quantity Price
sales?
Highest ---------------------- ---------------------- -------------------
Lowest ---------------------- ---------------------- -------------------

2 How often do you sell your produce? 1=Daily
2=Weekly
3=Monthly
3 How much, at average, do you sell per trans-
action? -----------------------------------------($/local currency)
M2. In the last three years how much did you sell?
43
2006 2007 2008
1 Amount produced Amount sold -Price /nuts or Amount produced Amount sold -Price Amount produced Amount sold
(Bags/nuts) Shs/bags (Bags/nuts) /nuts or Shs/bags (Bags/nuts) -Price /nuts or
Shs/bags
---------------------- ------------------------- -------------------- ---------------------- -------------------- ------------------

2 Where do you sell your produce? 1=Village, 2=Neighbouring village, 3=Nearby township,
4=Distant township, 5=Regional market, 6=Others (Spe-
cify)---------------
3 To whom do you sell your produce? 1=Local consumers, 2=Small traders/broker (bicycle),
3=Large trader (vehicle), 4=Others (Specify)------------
4 Who sets the price for the coconut fresh nuts when selling? 1=Farmers
2=Wholesalers
3=Retailers
4=Bargaining
5=Others (Specify)
5 Why do you prefer to sell your produce to any of the above? 1=Reasonable prices, 2=Immediate payments, 3= Market-
ing convenience, 4=Other (Specify)
6 What marketing activities did you incur and at what costs? Item Cost
Gunny bags
Twine
Transportation
Storage
Levies
Harvesting
Others (Specify)
7 Do you have any communal marketing arrangements? 1 = YES
44
2 = NO
8 What are the benefits of that association /organization?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
9 What are your major marketing constraints (rank them) 1=Low producer price, 2= Higher transport cost, 3= poor
road to the market, 4=Poor market to information, 5=Lack
Rank of reliable transport cost, 6=Others (Specify)
-----------
-----------
-----------
-----------
-----------
-----------
10 What are the opportunities you think are associated with coconut ----------------------------------------------------------------------
marketing? ----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
45
Stakeholders’ Survey (farmers, customers, merchants) regarding the Performance
(constraints and opportunities) for Coconut Value Chain; Baseline Study in
Tanzania, Benin and Sri-Lanka
Appendix 2: Questionnaire for Fresh Coconut Wholesalers
Questionnaire No…………..… Date…………..……..……..
A: RESPONDENTS DETAILS
A4 Country name
A6 District name
A7 Village/Market place name
Way point number
GPS READING N/S
E/S
Attitude (Meters)
B: BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
B1. Age (years)……………………………………………….
B2. Sex: 1 = Male 2 = Female
B4. Marital status (indicate by putting tick)
1=Single 2=Married 3=Widowed 4=Divorced 5=Separated
B5. Education level (indicate by putting tick)

1=None 2=Primary 3=Ordinary 4=Advanced 5=Diploma 6=Degree
secondary secondary
B6. What is duration in this business (years)………………………………..……………

B7.What was your opening capital (USD/local currency)……………
B8. What was the source of opening capital?
1=Own capital, 2=Loan,
3=Friends/relatives, 4= Others (Specify)
C. INFORMATION ON MARKETING CHANNELS AND STRUCTURE
46
C1. Where do you get coconut for sale?
1= from farmers 3= Open auction sale. 5= Secret bidding
2= from collectors. 4=Contract sale, 6=Others (Specify)………….
C2. Why do you prefer this source(s)?

1=Cheaper buying prices
2=Proximity to the market
3=Homeland
4=Any other reason (specify) ……………………………………………
….
C3. What are the terms of payment to the above sources?

1=Cash terms only 3=Both of the above terms
2=Credit terms 4=Other (Specify)…………………………
C5. What is the average amount of fresh coconuts do you buy on weekly basis?
.................................................
C6. Do you have any information pertaining to selling prices in other markets?
1= YES 2 = NO
C7. If Yes, how far from those markets?

1=Rural markets 2=Urban markets
C8. How do you obtain such pieces of information?

1=Through agents
2=Through own investigation / visits
3=Any other sources (specify) …………………………………………
….....
C9. How do you take advantage of such pieces of information?

...........................................................................................
C10. What is your opinion on new entrants in this market?

1=No objection
2=Would prefer restriction
3=Any other opinion (specify)…………………………………………
C11. Do you have any plans to quit he market in he near future?

1= YES 2= NO
C12. Give reasons for your answer please…………………………………………………
47
D. INFORMATION ON PRICING
D1. Please provide the average quantity of coconut brought per month and the buying
price at the supply source(s) during and off-seasons
SN Source During the season Off-seasons
Quantity* Price Quantity Price

(USD/Local (USD/Local
currency**) currency
1 Farmers
2 Others retailers
3 Wholesalers
4 Any other sources
(Specify)
*Local unit of measure be adjusted to kilograms
** Local currency be adjusted to USD
D2. What kind of marketing costs do you incur?

SN Activity Cost (USD/Local Currency)
Assembly
Grading
Packaging
Gunny bags
Twine
Transport (Lorry, bicycle etc)
Loading
Offloading
Meals
Levy/Taxes
Wastage (proportion.............)
Miscellaneous marketing services
D3. To whom do you sell the produce?

1. Consumers
2. Other traders
3. Any other customer (specify)…………………………………..
D4. What is the average unit selling price? (USD/local currency) ......................Per
…...........................
D5. Do you charge different prices to different buyers? Give reasons.............................
48
E. INFORMATION ON MARKETING EFFICIENCY
E1. Is the supply from the source (s) uniform over the years?
1=YES 2= NO
E2. If NO, kindly finish information on the following

1
2
3
4
E3. What do you think are the causes of these changes in supply?
E4. Who set price for coconut?

1. Farmer 3. Wholesales
2. Retailers 4. Any other (specify) …………………………..
E5. What criteria used in setting price

1. Costs incurred 3. Supply and demand
2. Through auction 4. Others (Specify) ………………………
E6. What is your opinion on the existing pricing mechanism? ................................
E7. What factors do you consider when buying or selling coconuts?

1. Price on which you are going to sell 3. Quantity of the fresh nuts
2. Accessibility of the market 4. Others specify………….
E8. What are your major marketing problems / challenges facing your business?
……………………………………………………….………………….
…………………………………………………………….…………….
………………………………………………………….……………….
E9. What should be done to improve marketing of coconut?
…………………………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………………..
49
E10. What are the challenges facing the fresh coconut trade?
.................................................................................................................
………………………………………………………………….……….
…………………………………………………………………………..
50
Appendix 3: Questionnaire for fresh coconut retailers
A4 Country name
A6 District name
A7 Village/Market place name
Way point number
GPS READING N/S
E/S
Attitude (Meters)
B1. Age (years)……………………………………………….
B4. Marital status (indicate by putting tick)

secondary secondary
B6. What is duration in this business (years)………………………………..……………

C. INFORMATION ON MARKETING CHANNELS AND STRUCTURE
51
C1. Where do you get coconut for sale?
1= from farmers 3= Open auction sale. 5= Secret bidding
2= from collectors. 4=Contract sale, 6=Others (Specify)………….
C2. Why do you prefer this source(s)?

1=Cheaper buying prices
2=Proximity to the market
3=Homeland
4=Any other reason (specify) ……………………………………………
….
C3. What are the terms of payment to the above sources?

1=Cash terms only 3=Both of the above terms
2=Credit terms 4=Other (Specify)…………………………
C5. What is the average amount of fresh coconuts do you buy on weekly basis?
.................................................
C6. Do you have any information pertaining to selling prices in other markets?
1= YES 2 = NO
C7. If Yes, how far from those markets?

1=Rural markets 2=Urban markets
C8. How do you obtain such pieces of information?

1=Through agents
2=Through own investigation / visits
3=Any other sources (specify) …………………………………………
….....
C9. How do you take advantage of such pieces of information?

...........................................................................................
C10. What is your opinion on new entrants in this market?

1=No objection
2=Would prefer restriction
3=Any other opinion (specify)…………………………………………
C11. Do you have any plans to quit he market in he near future?

1= YES 2= NO
C12. Give reasons for your answer please…………………………………………………
52
D. INFORMATION ON PRICING
D1. Please provide the average quantity of coconut brought per month and the buying
price at the supply source(s) during and off-seasons

1 Farmers
2 Others retailers
3 Wholesalers
4 Any other sources
(Specify)
*Local unit of measure be adjusted to kilograms
** Local currency be adjusted to USD
D2. What kind of marketing costs do you incur?

SN Activity Cost (USD/Local Currency)
Assembly
Grading
Packaging
Gunny bags
Twine
Transport (Lorry, bicycle etc)
Loading
Offloading
Meals
Levy/Taxes
Wastage (proportion.............)
Miscellaneous marketing services
D3. To whom do you sell the produce?

4. Consumers
5. Other traders
6. Any other customer (specify)…………………………………..
D4. What is the average unit selling price? (USD/local currency) ......................Per
…...........................
D5. Do you charge different prices to different buyers? Give reasons.............................
53
E. INFORMATION ON MARKETING EFFICIENCY
E1. Is the supply from the source (s) uniform over the years?
1=YES 2= NO
E2. If NO, kindly finish information on the following

1
2
3
4
E3. What do you think are the causes of these changes in supply?
E4. Who set price for coconut?

1. Farmer 3. Wholesales
2. Retailers 4. Any other (specify) …………………………..
E5. What criteria used in setting price

1. Costs incurred 3. Supply and demand
2. Through auction 4. Others (Specify) ………………………
E6. What is your opinion on the existing pricing mechanism? ................................
E7. What factors do you consider when buying or selling coconuts?

3. Price on which you are going to sell 3. Quantity of the fresh nuts
4. Accessibility of the market 4. Others specify………….
E8. What are your major marketing problems / challenges facing your business?
……………………………………………………….………………….
…………………………………………………………….…………….
………………………………………………………….……………….
E9. What should be done to improve marketing of coconut?
…………………………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………………..
54
E10. What are the challenges facing the fresh coconut trade?
.................................................................................................................
………………………………………………………………….……….
…………………………………………………………………………..
55
Appendix 4. Questionnaire for Fresh Coconut Consumers
A2 Name of respondent and Position
A3 Country name
A5 District name
A6 Name of market center
B. BACKGROUND INFORMATION
B1. Age of respondent ………………………………………………..
B3. Marital status;
B4. Level of education (indicate by putting tick)

secondary secondary
B5. Main occupation…………..…………….………...
C. COCONUT CONSUMPTION
C1. Why do you prefer coconut to other sources of cooking oil?

1=Cheaper
2=More delicious
3=Both (1) and (2)
4=Any other reason ……………………………………………….
C2. What particular size of nuts do you usually prefer to buy?

1=Small, 2=Medium, 3=Large.
C3. Why do you prefer the size in (explain) ………………………………..………...

………………………………………………………………………….……..
C4. How many coconuts do you buy per week? Average……………….…….………
B5. How much money do you spend on the nuts in above? Average (USD/Local cur-
rency………………………………………………………………..................
56
C6. How frequently do you buy in this market?
1=Daily, 2=Weekly, 3=Monthly…………….
C7. Besides this market, Do you get supplies from other sources?
1 = YES 2 = NO
C8. If YES what are they?

1=Rural markets
2=Outside sellers
3=Peddlers/hawkers
4=Others (specify) ……………………………………………
C9. How do you determine the buying prices?

1=Fixed buy the retailer
2=Bargaining with the retailers
3=Other (specify) ……………………………………….........
C10. What is the mode of payment?

1=Cash
2=Credit
3=Any other terms (specify) ………………………………….
C11. How do you view the price determination mechanism?

1=Fair
2=Unfair
3=Any other opinion …………………………………………..
C12. What are the major marketing problems with regard to coconuts in this market
(Rank them starting with the main problem)
1=Inadequate supplies
2=Price fluctuations
3=Low quality nuts small immature
4=Rigid pricing methods / no bargaining
5=Any other problems……………………………………………...…..
…………………………………………………………………...….……..….
…………………………………………………………………….……..…
C13. What do you think should be done to rectify the situation above?
1. …………………………………………………………….…………
………
2. ……………………………………………….…..………..…………
3. ………………………………………………………………….……
………
4. …………………………………………………………………….…
57
………
5. ……………………………………………………………………….
………
6.
C13. What are the challenges facing the fresh coconut trade?
1…………………………………………………………….…………
2……………………………………………….…..………..…………
3………………………………………………………………….……
4…………………………………………………………………….....
5. …………………………………………………
58
Appendix 5: Questionnaire for Fresh Coconut Processor
A2 Name of respondent and Position
A3 Country name
A5 District name
A6 Name of the enterprise
Full postal address
Email
Mobile
Fax
B1. Age (years)……………………………………………….

secondary secondary
B4. Type of business……………………………………………………………………..

B5. How long has your business been operating?…………..……………
B8. What is your product range? Mention please

1. ------------------------------------------------------------
2. ------------------------------------------------------------
3. ------------------------------------------------------------
4. ------------------------------------------------------------
5. ------------------------------------------------------------
6. -----------------------------------------------------------
59
B9. Which of your products is most important to you? (Rank them in term of sales)
B10. Do you experience fluctuations in demand for your products during the year?
1=Yes, 2=No
B11. Are there seasonal high or lows? (Obtain information on months)
B12. What is the cause of the seasonality? (try to get a reason eg many experience peak de-
mand associated with important religious festivals such as Ramadaan and Christmas):
B13. Do you experience unpredictable changes in demand for your products? (If yes) What
are the causes?
B14. What has been your annual output over recent years? (Tonnage or value, whichever is
most appropriate, for a large factory tonnage is best, for a small processor an estimate of
value would be more appropriate):
B15. For the industry as whole, is demand for your main products static/increasing or de-
creasing: (this question should help us to estimate market potential)
B16. What are your markets (local / export / both, if both then what are the proportions for
each market eg local 60% export 40%):
B17. How does government economic policy affect your business? (For instance interest
rates, inflation, tax, import duties, privatisation, infrastructural investment)
C. PROCESSING FACILITIES
1 What are the methods/equipments you use in -----------------------------------------

processing coconut? -----------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------
--------------------
2 What are the facilities you use in storing -----------------------------------------
coconut products? -----------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------
--------------
60
3 What are the constraints in processing coconut? 1=Marketing, 2=Capital/credit
availability, 3=Equipment &
Rank installations, 4=Product quality
----------- training, 5=Product price
----------- stabilization, 6=Lack of policies,
----------- 7= Others ( Specify)
-----------
-----------
-----------
4. What do you think are the opportunities for processing coconut? (Explain)
61
Appendix 6: Coconut Based Cropping Systems
A4 Country name
A6 District name
A7 Village name
Way point number
GPS READING N/S
E/S
Attitude (Meters)
B: SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC AND ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS

B1. Household socio-demographic characteristics
ID Name of Sex Age Relationship Formal Off school Working Working Major
household 1=Male (In with household schooling training on the off-farm livelihood
member 2=Female years head 1=Attended 1=None farm 1=Yes occupation
except 1=Head before 2=Vocational 1=Full 2=No
months 2=Spouse 2=Attending training time
for 3=Son/Daughter now 3= Short term 2=Part
infants 4=Relative 3=Never training on time
i.e. <1 5=Un-related attended best
year) 4=Too agriculture
young to practice (non-
attend extension
services)
01
62
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
11
12
Major occupation: 0=None, 1=Crop production, 2=Livestock keeping, 3=Business, 4=Salaried employment, 5= Wage work,
6=Technician, 7=Artisan/handcraft, 8=Natural resources (wood, charcoal etc), 9=Traditional healing/medicine, 10=Rent income, 11=
Others (Specify)
C: LAND USE AND TENURE

C1: Please provide the information on land use and tenure.
Land tenure Size (Acres) Size of land (Acres) under different land uses
structure Coconut Other perennial Annual crops Grazing Fallow
crops land
Private (titled) land
Land with use right
only
Share cropped land
Borrowed land
63
Rented
D.FARM SIZE AND LABOUR

D1.Please provide the information on the crops cultivated and the farm size in the year 2008
SN Crop Area under cultivation (acre) Area under fallow/grazing (acre)
D2. What is the labour input used in the first season in 2008
SN Land preparation Planting Fertilizer/chemic Weeding Harvest Storage
al application ing and (Shelling +
transpo storage
rting equipments
Crop Land Family Hired Family Hired Family Hired Family Hired Family Hired Famil
rent labour* labour labour labour labour labour labour labour labour labour y
cost cost cost cost cost cost cost cost cost cost cost labou
64
r cost
Family Labour: People (A.E)*Effective days*Effective Hours

A.E=Equivalents (1 Adult = A person of 15 and above of years of age; A child of 10-14 years of age will be equated to 0.5 of an adult
equivalent)
E: COCONUT CROPPING SYSTEM(S)

E1: What are the common crop mixture do you practice?
1= Intercropping in coconut gardens3
2= Mixed cropping in coconut gardens4
3= Coconut based multistoried cropping system5
4= High-density multispecies cropping systems6
E2: Please list the crop mixture for the coconut based cropping system and corresponding yields for last two seasons mentioned in D1
above
SN Crop Name Units Yield in 2007 Yield in 2008
Season 1 Season 2 Season 1 Season 2
3
Growing annuals/biennials in the interspaces of coconut
4
Growing of perennial crops in association with matured coconut palm, like cocoa, clove, nutmeg, coffee, pepper,
mulberry, jack, breadfruit, mango, sapota, papaya and timber yielding trees
5
Three or more crops having different morphological characteristics in the interspaces of coconut so as to intercept
solar radiation at different levels and exploit different soil zones
6
A large number of crop species with very high plant density, including annuals, biennials and perennials
65
1 Coconut
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
E3: Please rank the reasons for crop mixtures in your farm mentioned in D1 above, from 1 to 13, with one being the most important
and 13 being the least important
SN Reasons Rank
1 Household food security
2 Soil conservation
3 Crop compatibility
4 Reduced cultural practices
5 Crop insurance
6 Taste and preference
7 Cultural reasons
8 Harvesting at different times
9 Nutrient enhancement
10 Adapted agroforestry practices
11 Measures against crop failure
12 Incorporation of women crops
13 Ecological reasons
66
F.COCONUT ESTABLISHMENT
F1. What planting materials do you use? 1=Seed nuts, 2=Seedlings
F3. Where do you get coconut planting materials? 1=Own farm (Nurseries), 2=Fellow farmers, 3= Others (Specify)
F4. Please provide information on the coconut varieties in your farm

Variety Variety name Acreage Number of coconut palms Average nuts/palm/year
ID
G. COCONUT UTILIZATION
G1. Do you grow coconut for the following use? Code 1=Yes, 2=No
1. Coconut water
2. Roofing (Coconut fronds)
3. Coconut oil
4. Fuel wood
5. Palm wine
67
6. Others (Specify)
G2. Rank the following coconut use according to the importance of growing coconut
1--------------first choice a. Part of diet

2---------------second choice b. coconut
3---------------third choice c. Roofing
4---------------fourth choice d. Oil processing
f. Others (Specify)
G3. Rank the following coconut production constraints according to their importance.
1--------------first choice a. Pests

2---------------second choice b. Theft
3---------------third choice c. Vermin
4---------------fourth choice d. Disease
5---------------five choice f. Others (Specify)
68
Appendix 7. Consumer study (Willingliness-to- pay)
A4 Country name
A6 District name
A7 Village name
B; SECTION A
B-1 Have you ever purchased coconut products that were labeled grown free from
pesticides?
1. YES
2. NO
3. DON’T KNOW
B-2 Do you plan to purchase any coconut products during the next year?
1=YES, 2 =NO, 3=DON’T KNOW, 4=REFUSED
[IF ANSWERED ‘NO’ or ‘DON’T KNOW’ TO QUESTIONS A-1 AND A-2, SKIP TO
QUESTION A-4.]
B-3 Are the coconut products your purchased or plan to purchase for…
1=Commercial Purposes
2=Use in your home/residence
3=Both
8=DON’T KNOW
9=REFUSED
B-4 Have you ever purchased products that were labeled as manufactured from pesticide
free coconut?
1=YES, 2 =NO, 8 =DON’T KNOW, 9=REFUSED
B; WILLINGNESS TO PAY
Please examine this label that might appear on or nearby coconut products (label).
B1. Please circle the response that most closely reflects your opinions about coconut
products produce under biological control of coconut mites.
69
a. I support biological control of coconut mite and would pay a higher price for products
if they were produced under biological control.
b. I support biological control of coconut mite but not if it requires paying a higher price
for coconut products produced under biological control of coconut mite.
c. I do not support coconut products produced under biological control regardless of
whether it costs me anything
B2 Please look at the picture and of the following coconut products. Please indicate in the
space provided, how much more you would pay for the product that is manufactured
from coconut produced under biological control of coconut mite.
Product1= Price X1,……. (For BC)
Product2= Price X2,…….. (for BC)
B3. What are the reasons why you may buy coconut produced under biological control of
coconut mite? Please rank them.
--------------first choice a. Health benefit
2---------------second choice b. locally grown coconuts
3---------------third choice c. environmentally friendly method
4---------------fourth choice d. Pesticide free
5---------------five choice f. Labelled pesticide free
6---------------sixth choice g. At least 95% organic ingredient
B4. There are many reasons why a person might support coconut products produced
under biological control of coconut mite, but not if it requires paying a higher price.
Why do you feel this way?
1=can NOT afford to pay higher prices

2= do not believe it costs any more to make a coconut product
3=believe the manufacturers should not charge higher prices even if it costs more to make
coconut products
4=other
8 =DON’T KNOW, 9=REFUSED
C. About yourself and your household
We would like to conclude our survey by asking you a few questions about yourself and
your household. Remember, all responses will be held confidential.
C-1 Gender
1=Male
2=Female
C-2 Marital status

1=Never married
2=Now married
3=Now married but legally separated
70
4=Unmarried partner
5=Divorced
6=Widowed
B-3 What is your age? ___________________________________
C-4 What is the highest grade of school you completed? ________

1=No formal schooling
2=Grade school (1-8)
3=Some high school
4=High school graduate
5=Some college
6=College graduate
7=Post graduate
8=DON’T KNOW
9=REFUSED
C-5 Have you ever purchased labeled NON-COCONUT products (pesticide free
produce)?
[1=YES, 2=NO, 8=DON’T KNOW, 9=REFUSED]
C-6 How often do you read labels on products when purchasing them for the first time?
[1=Never, 2=Almost Never, 3=Sometimes, 4=Often, 5=Always, 8=DON’T
KNOW,
9=REFUSED]
C-7 Are you the primary food shopper in your household? (Make 50% or more of all
purchase)
1=Yes
2=No
C-9 What is your household size?
C-10. I am going to read a list of income categories for household income from all
sources before taxes for the year 2008. Please stop me when I get to yours.
1 = $4,999 or less
2 = $5,000 - $9,999
3 = $10,000 - $14,999
4 = $15,000 - $19,999
5 = $20,000 - $24,999
6 = $25,000 - $34,999
7 = $35,000 - $49,999
8 = $50,000 - $74,999
9 = $75,000 - $99,999
71
10 = $100,000 - $149,999
11 = $150,000 or more
12 = Don't know
13 = Refused
You may also provide your actual income ----------------------------------------------
72
Appendix 7; Draft budget for survey of 780 respondents/ households
Activity Item Number Amount of Cost per unit Total cost

time (Days) (in USD) (in USD)
Questionnaire Interviewers 3 2 40 240
pre-testing
Car Fuel7 1 1 200 200
Driver 1 2 40 80
Survey Interviewers 15 20 40 12000
Field assistant 3 15 20 900
(Extension Staff)
Car Fuel 3 - 900 2700
Drivers 3 15 40 1800
Air ticket Dar es 1 - 150 150
Salaam –Zanzibar
Air ticket 1 - 1299 1299
Tanzania-Benin
Air ticket Benin- 1 - 1101 1101
Sri-Lanka-
Tanzania
Accommodation 1 60 40 2400
and subsistence
(Benin and Sri-
Lanka)
Data entry Data entry 4 15 20 1200
operators
Total 24070
Contingency 2407
(10%)
Grand Total 26477
Note: Hyphen (-) indicates that the item is not applicable
7
If IITA vehicles are used, we will have to outsource vehicles
73
Appendix 8. Timetable of the PhD programme
Programme year and quarter

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4
Activity/output 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 Location
Proposal development
Set objective of the research * Tanzania
Prepare draft questionnaire * Tanzania
Proposal presentation * SUA
Pilot test * * Tanzania
Post pilot meeting * Tanzania
All
Sampling * countries
Staffing and training * All
All
Interviewer training * countries
All
Field work * * * * countries
Analysis and
documentations
Write preliminary report of
Tanzania
baseline survey *
Final report and
Tanzania
documentation *
All
Consumer study survey * * * * * countries
Impact and cost-benefit
studies * * * *
Data analysis and thesis
SUA
preparation * * *
74
Thesis defense * * SUA
Scientific Publications * IITA/UvA
75

PHD Proposal (Oleke, J.M.)

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

PHD Proposal (Oleke, J.M.)

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

PhD PROPOSAL

The impact of classical biological control of coconut mite on

income and food security: A stakeholders and socioeconomic

analysis of coconut production in Africa and Sri Lanka

Oleke, Jofrey Masahi

Figure 1. Coconut Production in Major

Source: Extracted from Funds for Commodities Report (Coir Processing

Intercropping with the multipurpose leguminous tree, Gliricidia sepium

1.1 Problem Statement and Justification

The present study is therefore an attempt to conduct stakeholder analysis to determine

(i) To assess the perception of the stakeholders (farmers, customers, merchants)

1.3 Research Questions/ Hypotheses

2.0. Research Methodology

2.2. Sampling Strategy

2.3. Data Collection Methods

2.4. Questionnaire Pre-testing

2.5. Data analysis

2.5.1. Analysis of Coconut Value Chain

2.5.3. Producer Share

2.5. 4. Cost and Benefit Analysis

Gross revenue (B) to the coconut production is given as

In reality, D is a function of N (i.e., D (N (1-E))), but for simplicity we assume that D is

In evaluating the effectiveness of chemical control or biological release of natural en-

Thus the optimal solution to this function occurs when

B( BC ) − C ( BC ) > B ( X ) − C ( BC ) > B( X )......................................................................(10)

Willingness-to-pay measurements are grounded in utility theory. Hanemann (1991) out-

(WTP = M ( p, U , q o ) − M ( p, Uq1 )..........................................................................................(12)

orP[ (ε 1 − ε o ) < (V1 − Vo )]...................................................................................................(14)

Where V is the indirect utility and ε is the error term.

The part worth utility is represented in the following relationship

Vij = βX i + δPi + ε ij .......................................................................................................(20)

Vij = βX i + δPi + χC ij + ε ij ...............................................................................................(21)

Vij = αS ij + βX i + δPi + χC ij + ε ij ...........................................................................................(22)

dVij = α∆S ij + β ∆X i + δ∆Pi + χ∆C ij + ε ij ..............................................................................( 23)

Y = β i − β 2 ∆ Pr ice + β 3 ∆Labeled + β 4 Local + β 5 ∆EnviromentalFriendly

2.5.6. Household Food Security

Fy = ( Fo + F p + Fd ) − ( Fs + Ft ) , at time t = a year…………………………………. (25)

The household food available for consumption is commonly believed to be dependent of

Thus the equation for estimation will be as written below;

2.6. Budget and Source of Funds

Appendix 1: Farmer’s questionnaire

PART A: RESPONDENTS DETAILS

PART B: SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC AND ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS

PART C: LAND USE AND TENURE

Non-crop income sources 2006 2007 2008

F4. If yes from above, please fill the Table below.

G: COCONUT PRODUCTION TREND1

S/N 2006/7 2007/8 2008/9

G2: Has the production of coconut in your farm

Item 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

G4: Please indicate the reasons for the answer in G2 above.

I5. About coconut and food security

2 How often did this happen? 1=almost every month

I7. Food consumption and dietary Diversity

2. Roofing (Coconut fronds)

1--------------first choice a. Part of diet

1 Do you process coconut to any form? 1=Yes (go to...)

Lowest ---------------------- ---------------------- -------------------

---------------------- ------------------------- -------------------- ---------------------- -------------------- ------------------

Appendix 2: Questionnaire for Fresh Coconut Wholesalers

Questionnaire No…………..… Date…………..……..……..

B5. Education level (indicate by putting tick)

B6. What is duration in this business (years)………………………………..……………

Family Labour: People (A.E)Effective daysEffective Hours