See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/228470404

Primary coffee processing in Ethiopia: patterns, constrains and determinants

Article · January 2007

CITATIONS READS

24 9,625

3 authors, including:

Richard O. Musebe Charles Agwanda

30 PUBLICATIONS   198 CITATIONS   
Centre for Agricultural Bioscience International
11 PUBLICATIONS   243 CITATIONS   
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Biological Control of soil insect pests View project

EFFECT OF DECISION MAKING STAGE ON ADOPTION OF TECHNOLOGY View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Richard O. Musebe on 12 March 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

African Crop Science Conference Proceedings Vol. 8. pp. 1417-1421
Printed in El-Minia, Egypt
ISSN 1023-070X/2007$ 4.00
© 2007, African Crop Science Society

Primary coffee processing in Ethiopia: patterns, constraints and determinants

RICHARD MUSEBE, CHARLES AGWANDA & MITIKU MEKONEN
CABI Africa, P.O. Box 633-00621 Nairobi, Kenya, r.musebe@cabi.org

Abstract: Quality is the most important parameter in the World coffee trade. The quality of coffee is determined by
40% in the field, 40% at post harvest primary processing, and 20% at secondary processing. This underscores the
importance of primary processing in enhancing the quality and value of coffee. The purpose of this study was to
examine coffee processing methods, evaluate constraints to processing and assess socio-economic factors determining
the type of processing method used by small scale farmers. Four hundred farmers were interviewed from the main
coffee growing areas. The survey revealed that the methods of coffee processing in Ethiopia are sun-drying of unpulped
cherries and wet processing, of which sun-drying is preferred by farmers. Washed coffee accounts for 29% while sun-
dried accounts for 71% of all processed coffee. Education level (p<0.01), area under coffee (p=0.02), distance to the
nearest coffee washing station (p=0.01) and age of the farmer (p=0.04) significantly determine the type of processing
method used. Farmers with higher education level and large land area under coffee prefer wet processing. Relatively
less educated, old and farmers located far away from the coffee washing stations use sun-dried processing. The key
constraints to coffee processing are lack of coffee processing facilities, high costs of materials for constructing the
raised drying beds, limited technical know-how and long distance to the few processing facilities. Coffee processing can
be improved through investment by provision of financial resources to purchase the requisite equipment and training so
that the necessary technical, financial and commercial capability would be created for the sustainable management of
the coffee processing facilities.
Key words: Coffee, livelihood, quality, sun-dried, socio-economic factors, wet processing

Introduction Materials and Methods

Coffee is an important export commodity for Ethiopia,
contributing 41% of the country’s total foreign exchange
earnings (IMF, 2006) and about 10% of the gross
domestic product. Over 25% of the population of
Ethiopia, representing 15 million people, are dependent
on coffee for their livelihoods (LMC, 2000). This includes
8 million people directly involved in coffee cultivation
and 7 million in the processing, trading, transport, and
financial sectors (Charveriat, 2001; Oxfam, 2002).
Almost 95% of the Ethiopian coffee is produced by about
1 million small-scale farmers, with an average farm size
of 0.5ha, while state-owned plantations account for 4.4%
and private investor plantations 0.6% (FDRE, 2003). The
quality of Ethiopian coffee is determined by two main
factors namely the geographic origin (Nicholas, 2007) and
the post harvest processing techniques. It is estimated that
40% of the quality of coffee is determined in the field,
40% at post harvest primary processing, and 20% at
secondary/export processing and handling including
storage. In order to enhance quality and market value of
Ethiopian coffee, improved primary processing by
farmers at the village level is a prerequisite. An
improvement in coffee quality, and therefore income, has
a direct impact on the livelihoods of a large number of
resource-poor people in the rural populations. This study
was conducted to examine the coffee processing methods
and evaluate processing costs, identify problems of coffee
processing and assess the factors
determining type of processing method used by the small
scale farmers.
A stratified multistage random sampling procedure was
adopted for the selection of the growers at different levels.
To get a representative sample of the whole of the coffee
growing area of Ethiopia, two regional states (Oromia and
Southern) were identified in the first stage. The two
regional states constitute one of the main coffee growing
areas. The second stage of sampling involved selection of
two zones from each of the regional states. Jimma and
Illubabor Zones from Oromia Regional State were
selected, while in the Southern Regional State Sheka and
Bench Maji Zones were selected. In the third stage of
sampling, one woreda (district) was selected from each of
the zones. The selection of the woredas was based on
prevalence of coffee processing problems. The selected
woredas are Goma, Alle Didu, Yeki and Sheko. The final
stage of sampling involved a random selection of 100
coffee growers from each of the woredas for individual
interviews. Four hundred coffee growers were
interviewed from the four woredas.
Data were collected using structured and pre-tested
questionnaires specially designed for the study. Coffee
growers were personally interviewed to ensure accuracy
and comprehension. Data was collected on a large number
of variables, which included age of the farmer, level of
education, source of labour, land under coffee cultivation,
resource endowment, crops grown, years of growing
coffee, varieties grown, methods of coffee processing and
constraints in coffee processing. Data was collected for
the agricultural year 2004.
The data collected were analysed using descriptive
statistics and regression analyses. Arithmetic means,
percentages and frequencies were computed and
compared. The analysis of the data primarily consisted of
 RICHARD MUSEBE et al.,
working out the averages for different variables to find
out the difference among different woredas. Estimates
were worked out per hectare in some cases for the
purpose of making comparisons and drawing inferences.
A binary logistic regression model was used in the
analysis to establish factors that influence choice of the
coffee processing method.
Results
Two methods of coffee processing are used in Ethiopia.
These are dry processing and washed coffee processing.
Under dry processing unpulped cherries are dried whole
in the sun under natural conditions after harvesting. In the
washed method the cherries are pulped immediately after
picking followed by fermentation and washing to remove
mucilage cover. The resulting parchment is dried in the
sun. Secondary processing is conducted by the akrabis
(local buyers) who generally operate hulling mills, where
the dried cherry/ parchment is hulled and prepared before
transport to the coffee auction in Addis Ababa or Dire
Dawa. Export processing of the green coffee is handled
by the exporters in their own facilities following the
central auction. In the case of the sun-dried coffees, this
consists of sorting, either by hand, or using electronic
colour-sorters, then blending the different truck-load lots
to make up export qualities and quantities. These are
generally in multiples of 18 tons, being the normal load of
a 20 foot container. For the washed coffees, after delivery
from the coffee processing and warehouse enterprise
(CPWE) to the exporter’s mill, the parchment coffee is
first hulled, then sorted and blended for export.
From the survey results the most common method for
post-harvest primary coffee processing was sun-drying.
This was followed by washed coffee processing using
hand pulpers and coffee washing stations. The survey
further revealed that 71% of the coffee produced by
smallholder farmers undergoes sun-drying and the
remainder is washed. These results are consistent with the
national figures on the extent of use of either of the
processing methods, that is 75-80% being sun-dried and
the remainder being washed coffee. Out of the 400
farmers interviewed 47.6% indicated preference for sun-
dried coffee processing, while 49.0% wished to produce
washed coffee using hand pulpers. The remaining
proportion of farmers (3.4%) preferred washed coffee
processed by the central coffee washing stations. There is
therefore higher preference for wet coffee processing.
This is because coffee processed through wet processing
method produces superior coffee brew and hence attract a
higher market value. Despite the observed preference for
the wet processing method, there were few hand pulpers
and central coffee washing stations accessible to the
farmers. A very small proportion of farmers (1%)
interviewed reported that they had access to hand pulpers
in the area. The same scenario applied to the central
coffee washing stations in the area. The situation was
worsened by the fact that most of the available hand
pulpers and coffee washing stations were not functioning.
In addition, only 8% of the farmers interviewed indicated
that they knew how to use the hand pulpers. This means
that in order to enhance the use of hand pulpers, training
to upgrade farmers’ skills on their use is a prerequisite.
1418
The training will also be necessary for the farmers to
understand the differences in the operation modes of the
different coffee processing facilities.
The key players in primary coffee processing are
individual farmers especially for sun-dried coffee
processing and, to a small extent, pulped coffee. Farmer
groups, cooperatives, non-governmental organizations
and the government are involved at a higher level, for
example ownership of coffee washing stations or
provision of hand pulpers. The existing pulpers are owned
mainly by private individuals and a few cooperatives. On
the other hand the existing coffee washing stations are
owned mainly by the cooperatives and a few private
individuals. Some washing stations are owned by state
farms. In the farmers’ view the pulpers and coffee
washing stations should continue being owned by private
individuals and cooperatives. This would encourage
efficient management and easy access by many growers.
The average distance to the nearest pulpers was 2.0 km
although the preferred distance to the nearest pulper or
coffee washing station is 1 km. The reason for the
selected distance was to reduce the transport costs,
guarantee immediate processing of the coffee, allow
access by all interested coffee growers, ensure efficient
management and group security/ care for the processing
equipment especially at night. In spite of the need to
improve access by the growers the location of the
processing facility should be such that it is close to a
water source and accessible by road.
About 50% of the farmers reported willingness to
contribute to the maintenance of hand pulpers or coffee
washing stations if such equipment was availed. Those
not willing to contribute to maintenance cited lack of
money as the main reason for their unwillingness to
contribute. The main forms of contribution in order of
importance were to contribute towards maintenance,
wages of the workers and payments for processing fees.
The high proportion of farmers not willing to pay for
maintenance of processing facilities indicates that there
may be need to educate the farmers about the differences
in quality of coffee produced by the two processing
methods coupled with provision of services such as rural-
based credit.
Farmers dry their coffee using different approaches.
About 48.0% spread their coffee on the ground, 49.5%
dry on raised drying beds and 2.5% dry on cemented
floors. The preferred method for coffee drying is on raised
drying beds as reported by 67.3% of the farmers.
However, most of the coffee is dried on the ground due to
the farmers’ inability to construct drying beds. Methods
for ensuring farmer accessibility to raised drying beds
need to be sought. This may involve initial supply of
materials/equipment for drying coffee; such as black net
shed, jute strip and plastic sheets. Indeed 81% of the
farmers indicated that they were interested in owning
raised drying beds. The farmer perceptions about the
current coffee processing practices were that although
washed coffee processing produced high quality coffee,
the method was expensive. Sun-dried coffee processing
on the other hand was easy to manage and it required
fewer resources. Raised drying beds were good for coffee
drying but farmers reported that they did not have the
materials for construction of the beds and this reduced the
use of raised drying beds.
In order to assess the existing coffee processing
practices, the processing costs per unit of clean coffee
were computed from various cooperatives. The coffee
processing costs in Ethiopian Birr (ETB) per kg of clean
coffee were computed from Oromia cooperative Bureau,
which had compiled the same from the cooperatives in the
area (Table 1). The sun-drying method has the lowest
costs but produces coffee of inferior quality compared
with the other the processing methods.

Table 1: Coffee processing costs (ETB)

Cost per kg of clean coffee
Processing method
(ETB)
Sun drying
Labour, salaries, and other operation costs 0.25
Others (Transport, stationery, income tax, municipality) 1.00
Hand pulpers
Labour, salaries and other operation costs 2.00
Maintenance and repairs 0.27
Other costs (income tax, local drying materials, etc.) 0.31
Large coffee washing stations (LCWS)
Labour, salaries and other operation costs 2.32
Fuel 0.26
Maintenance and repairs 0.32
Other costs (income tax, local drying materials, etc.) 0.26

A number of constraints are associated with coffee (Table 2). Farmers also reported that the coffee prices
processing in Ethiopia. Among these are lack of drying were lower than what they expected. In addition coffee
beds, shortage of hand pulpers and central coffee prices were not based on quality of coffee produced.
washing stations and high costs of drying materials

Table 2: Percentage of farmers reporting constraints according to processing method

Description of constraint Sun-dried Wet (washed)
processing processing
Lack of adequate drying beds 8.5 34.0
Shortage of hand pulpers 0.0 22.0
Shortage of central washing stations 0.0 9.0
Lack of technical know-how 3.5 3.0
Low prices of processed coffee 1.0 1.5
Poor drying due to heavy rainfall 4.0 2.5
Long distance to the washing stations 0.0 13.0
High costs & lack of materials for drying beds 83.0 15.0

Whereas the farmers are aware of drying coffee on
raised drying beds they were constrained by the high costs
of materials such as wire mesh, jute, plastic sheets and
tidernet used for constructing the raised drying beds. Lack
of technical know-how for coffee processing and lack of
funds to undertake processing are other constraints faced
by the small scale coffee farmers in Ethiopia. Due to the
shortage of processing facilities farmers interested in
washed coffee are forced to walk long distance to the
coffee washing station. In order to improve coffee
processing in Ethiopia farmers should be empowered to
construct more drying beds.
The government should provide loans to the coffee
growers so that they are able to purchase the coffee
processing inputs such as wire mesh, covering materials,
plastic sheets, storage bags and hand pulpers. It may also
be necessary for the government and non-governmental
organizations to pool resources and provide credit for this
endeavour in the short run. In the long run and for
purposes of sustainability farmers would have to purchase
materials and construct the drying beds. Materials for
construction of drying beds should be made available so
that the capable farmers are able to purchase. More hand
pulpers need to be provided on communal basis, meaning
that a few farmers can pool resources to purchase hand
pulpers. In the short run some facilitation through the
government is required for the purchase of hand pulpers
and construction of the coffee washing stations. To this
end formation of viable interest groups is necessary. It is
imperative that some training on proper harvesting,
pruning and coffee processing is provided to the farmers.
Farmers require encouragement to use ladders for
harvesting the tall coffee trees and selective picking of red
cherries for wet processing. This should be accompanied
by proper husbandry practices so that in the long run
farmers have proper size coffee trees for ease of
harvesting.
The choice of processing method to use depends on a
number of factors. Among these are area under coffee,
how long a farmer has been growing coffee, education
level of the farmer, access to water, distance to nearest
coffee washing station and age of the farmer. In order to
determine the factors that significantly affect choice of the
processing method a binary logistic regression model was
used. The dependent variable, processing method, is a
binary variable with 0 representing sun-dried processing

1419
 RICHARD MUSEBE et al.,
and 1 representing washed coffee processing method.
Education levels, area under coffee, distance to the
nearest coffee washing station and age of the farmer
significantly determine the type of processing method to
be used (Table 3). There is no significant relationship
between distance to the nearest water source and choice
of the processing method. Similarly, there is no
significant relationship between length of time a farmer
has been growing coffee and choice of the method of
processing.
Farmers with higher education level prefer washed
coffee processing method while the relatively less
Table 3: Results of binary logistic regression
Variable Coefficient B
Age of farmer (years)
Education level of farmer
Distance to the nearest water source (km)
Area under coffee (ha.)
Length of time growing coffee (years)
Distance to the nearest coffee washing station (Km)
Constant
Notes: * - significant at the 5% level
** - significant at the 1% level
The survey identified distance to the processing
facility, area under coffee, quantity of coffee produced,
education levels of the farmers and resource ownership as
the main factors which influence the use of the processing
method by the farmers. Farmers that were close to
processing stations had a higher tendency to use them
compared to those far away. Farmers that produce a lot of
coffee tend to have access to washed coffee facilities
possibly because they generate more returns that cushion
the transport costs. More educated farmers used washed
coffee processing, meaning that education had some
influence on preference for washed coffee processing
facilities. Farmers’ level of awareness also determines
their accessibility to the coffee processing facilities. This
means that creating awareness through education or
advertising of the processing facilities may help improve
the farmers’ decision making regarding choice and access
to the processing facilities.
Discussion
Coffee production is a vital business and wealth creation
opportunity that contributes to poverty reduction in the
main coffee producing areas. There is high level
dependence on coffee production and lack of
opportunities for marketing other food crops from these
areas (Petty et al., 2003). The livelihoods of small scale
farmers in these areas are determined by the income from
coffee sales. The income received from coffee depends on
the quality of coffee, derived especially from post harvest
primary processing. The key primary processing method
used is sun-drying although it produces coffee of inferior
quality compared to wet processing. ICO (2006) also
reports that most of the coffee in Ethiopia is processed by
sun-drying. However consumers prefer washed coffee
(Ethiopia, 2006), meaning that the most common
processing method does not produce the preferred quality
1420
educated farmers prefer sun-dried coffee processing.
Farmers with large land area under coffee prefer the
washed coffee processing method. Farmers who are
located far away from the coffee washing stations prefer
to use the sun-dried processing method. This means that
in order to increase washed coffee processing more coffee
washing facilities should be made available. This in
essence underscores the need for improving farmer access
to the coffee washing facilities. Old farmers are more
likely to use the sun-dried coffee processing method.
Standard Error Wald Sig. Exp(B)
-0.059* 0.029 4.096 0.043 0.942
1.104** 0.344 10.299 0.001 3.015
-0.785 0.459 2.921 0.087 0.456
0.269* 0.118 5.177 0.023 1.308
0.038 0.028 1.870 0.171 1.039
-0.302* 0.125 5.811 0.016 0.739
-0.821 1.333 0.379 0.538 0.440
of coffee. Farmers also prefer wet processing because it
sells at significant premiums over sun-dried coffee
(Nicholas, 2007), but continue using the sun-drying
method due to a number reasons indicted earlier. Thus, a
number of competitive advantages may still be seized if
quality and consistency are guaranteed.
Given that the agreement of consumer and produce
preferences, it is important to empower farmers to
produce washed coffee. The approach in this regard
would be initially to encourage group ownership of
processing facilities and provision of credit facilities for
the purchase of processing facilities. This is because the
major reason for the limited use of wet processing is
shortage of the processing facilities. Facilitation to own
the processing facilities should be accompanied by
provision of training on selective harvesting of red
cherries and processing methods. There is therefore need
for investment by the government, non-governmental
organizations and any other interested parties in the
purchase of processing equipment and training in order to
create the necessary technical, financial, commercial and
marketing capability for the sustainable management and
use of the coffee processing facilities. Other than direct
investment, the government should encourage
cooperatives and traders to invest in machinery to raise
the output of washed coffee.
Farmers were willing to contribute to the maintenance
of a coffee processing facility such as a hand pulper or
large coffee washing station if they would be made
available, which is a positive attitude towards group
ownership. This calls for a clear way of determining the
processing costs and costs of maintenance. Once the costs
are established, initially there would be joint ownership of
the processing facilities coupled with a strict savings
regime aimed at the purchase of hand pulpers for the
group and eventually for the individual farmers.
Coffee in Ethiopia is produced under different
production systems and all the coffee from some
 production systems especially forest coffee may not be
amenable to wet processing. This means that some
coffees will continue being processed using sun-drying. In
this case improved sun-drying is advocated. This is where
coffee is dried on raised drying beds and in approved
quantities to ensure efficient drying as opposed to drying
on the ground.
Farmers recognize the importance of the quality of
coffee but there is no price differentiation based on
quality. The buyers do not use containers with different
prices for purchasing coffee on the basis of quality. This
has tended to discourage producers from serious
involvement in quality improvement endeavours. Efforts
have to be made to differentiate coffee processed on the
basis of quality to enable farmers producing high quality
coffee to earn a premium. This could be through
promotion. It is expected that the premium so obtained
would encourage the farmers to get involved more in
production of coffee of high quality. Farmers need to be
encouraged to evaluate coffee before selling. This calls
for clear linkage with the coffee liquoring unit for
sampling and quality evaluation, and to encourage
farmers to store coffee up to the point where they know
the value before selling. Building group processing,
quality control and marketing critical mass to produce
warrantable lots is therefore a prerequisite.
Acknowledgements
The study was undertaken as part of the project titled
“Improving coffee quality in East and Central Africa
through enhanced processing practices (Ethiopia and
Rwanda)”, which was financed by the Common Fund for
Commodities, with co-financing by Illycafé and
counterpart contribution from the Government of
Ethiopia. The project was implemented in Ethiopia with
CABI Africa as the project executing agency.
1421
View publication stats
References
Charveriat, C. 2001. Bitter coffee: how the poor are
paying for the slump in coffee prices. Oxfam GB
Ethiopia. 2006. Coffee history, production and economy
[Online]. Available WWW:
http://www.treecrops.org/country/ethiopia_coffee.htm
ICO (International Coffee Organization). 2006. Field
processing. [Online]. Available WWW:
http://www.ico.org/field_processing.asp
FDRE. 2003. Comprehensive coffee development and
marketing plan. Addis Ababa: Federal Democratic
Republic of Ethiopia (FDRE), Ministry of Agriculture
and Rural Development
IMF. 2006. The Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia:
selected issues and statistical appendix. International
Monetary Fund (IMF) Country Report 6/122.
Washington: IMF.
LMC. 2000. International Coffee Organization/ Common
Fund for Commodities study of marketing and trading
policies and systems in selected coffee producing
countries: Ethiopia country profile. Study prepared by
LMC International Ltd. Oxford: England.
Nicholas Petit, 2007. Ethiopia’s coffee sector: a bitter or
better future? Journal of Agrarian Change 7(2), 225-
263.
Oxfam, 2002. Crisis in the birth place of coffee. Oxfam
International research paper, September 2002
[Online]. Available WWW:
http://www.maketradefair.com/en/assets/english/coffe
ecrisisKafaEthiopia.pdf
Petty, C., Seaman, J. & Majid, N. 2003. Coffee and
household poverty: a study of coffee and household
economy in two districts of Ethiopia
[Online].Available WWW:
http://www.savethechildren.org.uk/scuk_cache/scuk/c
ache/cmsattach/1776_Ethiopia_study-final.pdf