SALALE UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE AND NATURAL RESOURCE

DEPARTMENT OF AGRIBUSINESS AND VALUE CHAIN

MANAGEMENT

Senior Research on: value chain analysis of sheep in Girar Jarso Woreda,
North Shewa Zone, Oromia National Regional State, Ethiopia

NAME Muket Awoke Tsegaye kebede Yezina Tariku

ID NO RU/0780/13 RU/2015/13 RU/0727/13

ADVISOR: Bekalu W. (MSc)

IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE

DEGREE OF BACHELOR OF SCIENCE IN (AGRIBUSINESSAND
VALUE CHAIN MANAGEMENT)

MAY, 2024
FITCHE, ETHIOPIA

i
 APPROVAL SHEET SAMPLE

Submitted by:

Name of the student Signature Date

Muket awoke __________ __________

Name of Advisor Signature Date

Bekalu W. (MSc) __________ __________

Name of Coordinator Signature Date

Bekalu W. (MSc) __________ __________

Name of Head Signature Date

Department

Sena Amsalu (MSc) __________ __________

 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

First of all, I would like to thank GOD, for his help in the successful completion of this paper and
I would like to thank St. Virgin MARY Mother of God.

I am grateful to my respected major advisor Mr. Bekalu, (MSc) who helped me starting from title
selection up to detailed analysis through his earnest and constructive comments in the preparation
of the manuscript. Successful accomplishment of this research would be had been very difficult
without his time devotion from the early design of the topic up to the final write-up of this essay
by providing valuable, practical and useful comments. And also, I would like to extend thanks to
Salale University, College of Agriculture and Natural Resource, Department of Agribusiness and
value chain management workers who provide additional service to write this senior research
proposal. I would like to thank the Girar Jarso woreda Office of agriculture for the support and
consults they did during the preliminary survey and survey time.

I also wish to express my heartfelt thanks to the many farmers and traders and consumers in the
district who responded to my numerous questions with patience.

ii
 LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

CC Contingency Coefficient

DA Development agent

DOoARD Development agent, office of Agriculture and Rural Development

CSA Central Statistics Agency

GJWOA Girar jarso woreda Office of Agriculture

ICARDA international center for agricultural research in dry land areas

ILRI international livestock research institute

M4P Making Markets Work for the Poor

NGO Non-Governmental Organization

OoARD Office of Agriculture and Rural Development

UNIDO United Nations Industrial Development Organization

VCA Value chain analysis

VIF Variance Inflation Factor

iii
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

APPROVAL SHEET SAMPLE .......................................................................................i

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .............................................................................................ii

LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................. iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................. iv

LIST OF TABLES....................................................................................................... vi

LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................................... vii

ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................ viii

1. INTRODUCTION............................................................................................... 1
1.1 Background of the Study................................................................................................................................. 1
1.2. Statement of the Problem ............................................................................................................................. 2
1.3 Research Questions ........................................................................................................................................ 3
1. 4. Objectives of the Study ................................................................................................................................. 3

1.4.1. General Objective ........................................................................................ 3

1.4.2 Specific Objectives........................................................................................ 3

1.5. Scope and Limitations of the Study ............................................................................................................... 4
1.6. Significance of the Study ................................................................................................................................ 4

2. LITERATURE REVIEW .......................................................................................... 5

2.1. Concept and Definitions................................................................................................................................. 5
2.2. Analysis of Sheep Value Chain Systems ......................................................................................................... 6
2.3. Sheep Value Chain in Ethiopia ....................................................................................................................... 6
2.4 Constraints and Opportunities of sheep production and Marketing ............................................................. 7
2.5. Empirical Literature........................................................................................................................................ 7
2.6. Conceptual Framework .................................................................................................................................. 9

3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY .............................................................................. 11

3.1. Description of the Study Area ...................................................................................................................... 11

3.2. Types, Sources and Methods of Data Collection ........................................... 11

3.3. Sampling Size and Sampling Technique ....................................................................................................... 12
3.4. Methods of Data Analysis ............................................................................................................................ 13
iv
3.4.1 Descriptive Analysis ....................................................................................13

3.4.2. Econometric analysis ..................................................................................13

3.5. Definition of Variables and Working Hypothesis ......................................................................................... 14
3.5.1. Dependent variables ................................................................................................................................. 14

3.5.2. Independent variables ...............................................................................14

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ............................................................................... 19

4.1 Descriptive statistics ..................................................................................................................................... 19

4.1.1 Demographic characteristics of producers ...............................................19

Experience in sheep production (EXPE) .............................................................................................................. 20

4.1.3 Demographic and socio-economic characteristics of traders ...................22

4.1.4 Demographic and socio-economic characteristics of consumers .............23
4.2 Value Chain Analysis ..................................................................................................................................... 25

4.2.1. Value chain actors and their roles in sheep value chain .........................25
4.2.2 Value chain map of producers ...................................................................28
4.3. Econometric Analysis .................................................................................... 30
4.3.1. Determinants of quantity of sheep supplied ............................................30
4.4 Constraints and Opportunities of sheep production and Marketing ........................................................... 33

4.4.1 Constraints and Opportunities of sheep production and Marketing of

producers .............................................................................................................33

4.4.2. Sheep marketing Constraints and opportunities of traders ......................34

5. CONCLUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................................... 35

5.1. CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................................................ 35
5.2 RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................................................... 36

6. REFERENCES ..................................................................................................... 38

7. APPENDICES ..................................................................................................... 43

v
 LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Summary of variables description and hypothesis ........................................................ 17

Table 2: Demographic characteristics of producers .................................................................. 19

Table 3: socio-economic characteristics of producers ............................................................... 19

Table 4: Institutional factors ..................................................................................................... 22

Table 5:Demographic characteristics of sampled trader ............................................................ 22

Table 6: Financial Capital of sampled traders ........................................................................... 23

Table 7:Source of working capital for sample traders ................................................................ 23

Table 8:Source of loan for sampled traders ............................................................................... 23

Table 9:Demographic Characteristics of consumers .................................................................. 24

Table 10:Socioeconomic characteristics of consumers ............................................................... 24

Table 11: Determinants of quantity of sheep supplied (Result from OLS) ................................... 31

Table 12:Appendix 1, Conversion factors used to compute TLU ................................................ 43

Table 13:Appendix 2, VIF for multicollinearity diagnosis .......................................................... 43

Table 14:Appendix 3, Contingency coefficient of discrete variables ........................................... 44

Table 15: Appendix 4, heteroscedasticity test result................................................................... 44

Table 16: Appendix 5, model summary determinants of quantity of sheep market supply (OLS
estimation)................................................................................................................................. 45

vi
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Conceptual framework............................................................................................... 10

Figure 2: Location of the study area .......................................................................................... 11

Figure 3: Value chain map of sheep in study area ..................................................................... 29

vii
 ABSTRACT

Sheep production is an integral part of the subsistence crop-livestock systems of Ethiopian

highlands and plays crucial role in economic development and poverty reduction. This study was
aimed at evaluating value chain of sheep in Girar Jarso District of Oromia national Regional
State. For the study data were collected from both primary and secondary sources. Primary data
were collected from a randomly selected 71 sample households, 13 traders, 3 butchers, 4
hotels/restaurants and 15 consumers interviewed through a semi-structured questionnaire.
Multiple linear regression model was used to identify factors affecting quantity of sheep supplied
to market in the study area. The value chain analysis revealed that the major actors in the district
being input suppliers, sheep producers, collectors, small traders, large traders, hotels/restaurants,
butchers, and consumers. The result indicated that quantity of sheep supplied to market is
significantly and positively affected by sex of household head, experience of sheep farming,
Livestock ownership other than sheep, access to credit and negatively affected by family size,
market information, and distance from nearest market. Therefore, policy aiming for increasing
female participation, providing credit services, strengthening continuous knowledge and skill
development, should focus on tailored information delivery, strengthening and leverage policies
on improving rural family planning and developing and improving infrastructure. In addition,
implementing sustainable grazing practices, enhancing disease prevention measures, and
promoting genetic selection for improved productivity and resilience are recommended to
accelerate the value chain’s development in the study area

Key words: multiple linear regressions, Sheep, Value Chain.

viii
 1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the Study

Ethiopia is one of the African countries with the largest small ruminant population in the
continent containing about 30.70 million sheep and 30.20 million goats (CSA, 2017). Small
ruminant production is a major component of the livestock sector in Ethiopia. Farmers and
pastoralists depend on small ruminants for much of their livelihood, often to a greater extent
than on cattle, because sheep and goats are generally owned by the poorer sectors of the
community (Gizaw, 2013). Small ruminants are also source of foreign currency (Gebremedhin
et al., 2015). The small ruminant population of Ethiopia, including the pastoral areas, is about
66 million of which about 35 million is sheep (Negassa et al., 2011). Small ruminants
contribute a quarter of the domestic meat consumption; about half of the domestic wool
requirements; about 40% of fresh skins and 92% of the value of semi processed skin and hide
export trade of the country. They represent only 7% of the average total capital invested in
livestock in the mixed crop livestock production system, but they account on average for 40%
of the cash income earned by farm households and 19% of the total value of subsistence food
derived from all livestock production and 25% of total domestic meat consumption (Mengesha
and Tsega, 2012).Small ruminants have many advantages over large ruminants for most
smallholder farmers, including among others, lower feed costs, quicker turnover, easy
management, quickly multiplication, resilient, easily convertible to cash to meet financial
needs, and appropriate size at slaughter (Wilson, 2018; Abegaz, 2011; Donkin, 2015).
Moreover, due to their high fertility, short generation interval, adoption in harsh environment
and their ability to produce on limited feed resource, they are considered as investment and
insurance (Tsedeke, 2007). They also suffer far less mortality during periods of drought than
large ruminants (Galal, 2012; Wilson, 2021). In addition, subsistence farmers prefer small
ruminants as the risk of large ruminants dying and leaving them with nothing being too great
(Sölkner et al., 2016). In Ethiopia, sheep is the second most important species of livestock with
diverse breeds and ecotypes and the population is distributed from cool alpine climate of the
mountains to the aridpastoral areas of the lowlands. There are nine known breeds of sheep
characterized through phenotypic and molecular methods in Ethiopia (Gizaw et al., 2011).
About 99.72% of the total sheep population of Ethiopia is made up of indigenous breeds which
are owned and managed by resource poor smallholder farmers and pastoralists under traditional
and extensive production systems (CSA, 2017). Market oriented or commercial production is
almost nonexistent. Thus, the level of production and productivity of sheep fattening in the
country is generally low. For instance, the average carcass weight per slaughtered animal for
the years 2006 to 2007 was about 10kg (FAO, 2009, cited by Worku and Dereje, 2017). On the
other hand, there is huge demand for live sheep and sheep meat in the Gulf countries (Solomon
et al., 2011). According to Legese et al., (2014), the demand and prices for sheep are also
increasing locally due to increased urbanization and increased income but production is not
market oriented and supply is also inconsistent. In addition to production, lack of well-
functioning marketing systems that effectively link the many smallholder producers and their
cooperatives with domestic and international markets which affect the performance of the
existing sheep marketing system is the main constraint of sheep value chain (Zahra et al., 2014).

1.2. Statement of the Problem

Ethiopia owns large and genetically diverse livestock resources. However, the contributions of
the livestock subsector in the country, at either macro or micro level is below potential (Legese
et al., (2014)). The levels of foreign exchange earnings from livestock and livestock products
are much lower than would be expected, given the size of the livestock population. A number
of fundamental constraints underlie these outcomes, including inadequate veterinary services,
feed shortages, poor infrastructure, insufficient financial services and low levels of technical
inputs (Gebremedhin et al., 2007; Gizaw et al., 2011). The existing livestock marketing system
in Ethiopia is fragmented and disorganized and the supply chain linking smallholder producers
with domestic consumers and export markets is long and extended. This depresses farm gate
prices and prevents producers from receiving better revenues, since a vast array of middlemen
tap a large proportion of the price paid by consumers and exporters (Legese and Hordofa,
2011). This is because of the entire livestock supply chain in the country is further characterized
by numerous actors. This makes the supply chain unnecessarily long with increased transaction
costs and without significant value-added activities (Negassa et al., 2011). There is a general
increase in demand for sheep and goat meat both in the domestic and export markets over time.
However, the supply of small ruminant markets is not well strategized as production is not
market-oriented. Moreover, there is no livestock market information system that informs
farmers about which animals are needed, who are the potential buyers, and prices for the
different class of animals. Developing efficient input delivery systems, knowledge-based
animal husbandry (including feeding, breeding, housing and health care), cost-effective
marketing, and efficient and equitable supply chains are important interventions (Legese et al.,

2
2014).Oromia regional state is one of the potential areas of sheep production which accounts
32.14%of the total number of sheep production next to Amhara regional states which accounts
34.97 % of total number of sheep production in the country respectively. According to the
report of CSA (2017), annually Oromia regional state produces 23,890 sheep. Shewa zone also
shares 5.17% of sheep produced in the country (CSA, 2017). Girar Jarso is also the potential
area of sheep production in Shewa zone (GJWOA, 2017). Value chain analysis enables to
understand the relationship among input suppliers, producers and other actors.

In Ethiopia, there are many studies which were conducted on sheep value chain analysis some
of those are (Alemu, et al., 2019), (Eyob and Zewudu, 2016), (Beyene and Anja, 2018), and
little research has been done on the value chain analysis of sheep but no research that has been
conducted in relation to factors affecting quantity of sheep supply to the market in the study
area. Besides, the study area is more favorable for sheep production and marketing.
Nevertheless, a small number of sheep are supplied and sold in the market due to different
factors, and these factors are not identified in the study area (District report, 2020). Therefore,
this study has attempted to fill the research and information gap by identifying sheep value
chain actors and their roles, opportunities and constraints of sheep production and marketing,
and factors affecting the quantity of sheep supplied to the market.

1.3 Research Questions

This study attempted to answer the following research questions

1. Who are the sheep value chain actors and what are their roles in the study area?
2. what are the opportunities and constraints of sheep production and marketing in
Girar Jarso Woreda?
3. What are the factors that affect quantity of sheep supplied to the market in the study
area?

1. 4. Objectives of the Study

1.4.1. General Objective

⮚ The study was evaluating value chain analysis of sheep in Girar Jarso Woreda.

1.4.2 Specific Objectives

1. To identify sheep value chain actors and their roles in the study area.
2. To identify the opportunities and constraints of sheep production and marketing in
the study area.
3
 3. To analysis factors that affect quantity of sheep supplied to the market in the study
area.

1.5. Scope and Limitations of the Study

Chain analysis includes from producers to the end users covering wide range of geographical
areas stretching from local to global markets. Value however, this study focuses only on value
chain analysis of sheep in Girar Jarso Woreda (Shewa zone of Oromia) as a case of reference.
Regarding the limitation of the study, due to shortage of time and finance the study does not
represent the whole value chain of sheep in the country and it only focuses on the sheep value
chain that originates from major sheep producing kebeles in the woreda. Hence, the
generalization of the finding is limited to the study area and locations with similar socio-
economic characteristics.

1.6. Significance of the Study

This research was help to generate information with regard to value chain analysis and
marketing of sheep which identify areas of intervention. The major significance of this study
would help serve as a source of information on the market performance and benefit share of
actors of sheep value chain in the study area including research and development organizations,
traders, producers, policy makers, input suppliers, government and nongovernmental
organizations to assess their activities and ultimately influence the design and implementation
of policies and strategies. It was also informing an existing problems and entry points in the
value chain.

4
 2. LITERATURE REVIEW

In this part of the study, definitions and basic concepts of value chain, analysis of sheep value
chain system, sheep value chain in Ethiopia, conceptual framework, review of empirical studies
were discussed. Finally, it was being presented the conceptual frame work of the study.

2.1. Concept and Definitions

Value Chain: The value chain is a concept which can be simply described as the entire range
of activities required to bring a product from the initial input-supply stage, through various
phases of production, to its final market destination. The production stages entail a combination
of physical transformation and the participation of various producers and services, and the
chain includes the products disposal after use. As opposed to the traditional exclusive focus on
production, the concept stresses the importance of value addition at each stage, thereby
threatening production just as one of the several value-adding components of the chain (Gereffi
and Kaplinsky, 2013 as cited by Legese and Hordofa, 2011). The value chain is a concept
which can be simply described as the entire range of activities required to bring a product from
the initial input-supply stage, through various phases of production, to its final market
destination (UNIDO, 2009). The production stages entail a combination of physical
transformation and the participation of various producers and services, and the chain includes
the products disposal after use. Value chain describes the full range of value-adding activities
required to bring a product or Service through the different phases of production, including
procurement of raw materials and other inputs, assembly, physical transformation, acquisition
of required services and ultimately consumers (Kaplinsky and Morris 2002). It includes all of
the vertically linked, Interdependent processes that generate value for the consumer, as well as
horizontal linkages to other value chains that provide intermediate goods and services. Value
chains focus on Value creation typically via innovation in products or processes, as well as
marketing and also on the allocation of the incremental value (Webber and Labaste 2010).

Value Chain Actors: These are those involved in producing, processing, trading or consuming
a certain agricultural commodity. It refers direct chain actors which are commercially in the
chain: producers, traders, retailers, consumers and indirect actors which provide financial or
non-financial support service, such as bank and credit agencies, business service providers,
government, researchers and extensions (Kit et al., 2006).

5
Value Chain Analysis: Value chain analysis describes the activities within and around an
organization, and relates them to an analysis of the competitive strength of the organization
(Porter, 2011). Therefore, it evaluates which value each particular activity adds to the
organization’s products or services. This idea was built upon the insight that an organization is
more than a random compilation of machinery, equipment, people and money. Only if these
things are arranged into systems and systematic activates it were become possible to produce
something for which customers are willing to pay a price. Porter argues that the ability to
perform particular activities and to manage the linkages between these activities is a source of
competitive advantage.

Value Chain Mapping: Mapping a chain refers creating a visual representation of the
connections between businesses in value chains as well as other market players. Mapping a
value chain gives a clear understanding of the sequence of activities and the key actors and
relationships involved in the sheep value chain. It provides tools on how to capture the different
dimensions of a value chain. Mapping a value chain eases a clear understanding of the series
of activities and the main actors and relationships involved in the value chain (UNIDO, 2009
as cited in Quader, 2012). Moreover, making a value chain map is a way of making what is
seen and encountered more easily understood: A picture is worth thousand words (M4P, 2008).
Value chain map is a visual representation of the relationship of actors in a value chain and it
helps to understand the functional levels of the chain and the operators associated with the
levels including the linkage at different levels of the chain thus facilitating the analytical study
of the chain with visual representation (Biruk, 2015). The value chain map generally represents
the micro and meso levels of the value chain actors. The basic functions and chain operators
including the operational service providers constitute the micro value chain.

2.2. Analysis of Sheep Value Chain Systems

In the African context, markets for agricultural products would normally refer to market places
(open spaces where commodities are traded). According to FAO/ILRI (2014) sheep markets
typically differ in several key ways: a) by the number of intermediaries involved, and b) the
role each plays.

2.3. Sheep Value Chain in Ethiopia

Ethiopia has a cattle population of about 53.4 million heads and the majorities (99.26%) of
them are local breeds, which are found in rural areas under subsistence adequately market

6
oriented (Eyob and Zewudu, 2016). Demand for sheep has increased highly over the last five
years (Ashenafi et al., 2013). This is due to an increasing number of consumers and an
expansion of the export market at national level. The supply of sheep, though not enough to
satisfy the increasing demand, is increasing in different local markets.

2.4 Constraints and Opportunities of sheep production and Marketing

According to Alemu, et al. (2019), (Eyob and Zewudu, 2016), (Beyene and Anja, 2018), limited
access to improved genetics, inadequate veterinary services, and low adoption of modern
management practices hinders the productivity and profitability of sheep farming. Challenges
such as high disease prevalence, poor nutrition, and limited access to quality feeds and grazing
lands contribute to low growth rates and reproductive inefficiencies. In terms of marketing,
inadequate market infrastructure, limited value addition, and lack of market information and
linkages pose obstacles to reaching domestic and international markets. Additionally, the
absence of well-defined grading and certification systems, as well as inconsistent quality
standards, can affect market competitiveness. Addressing these constraints requires
investments in research and extension services, capacity building, improved animal health
services, market infrastructure development, and policy support to promote sustainable sheep
production and effective market linkages. Ethiopia has a large population of sheep and is
known for its diverse sheep breeds that possess desirable traits such as adaptability to harsh
environments, high fertility rates, and good meat and wool quality. This enables farmers to
engage in meat production, wool production, and breeding activities, targeting both domestic
and international markets. Additionally, the country's growing population and increasing
urbanization create a demand for sheep meat, wool, and dairy products, offering opportunities
for value-added processing and marketing. Moreover, agrotourism and educational programs
related to sheep farming can be developed to capitalize on the country's rich cultural heritage
and attract visitors. To tap into these opportunities, it is crucial for stakeholders to invest in
breed improvement, modern husbandry practices, market research, and infrastructure
development.

2.5. Empirical Literature

A study conducted on analysis of live sheep market chain: the case of Legambo District, South
Wollo Zone, Amhara National Regional State, Ethiopia (Usman Mohammed, 2021): Mill’s
ratio, extension contact, other livestock, use of veterinary service, distance to the market,

7
income from non-sheep activities and access to market information had significant effect on
sheep market supply.

A study conducted on goat value chain analysis by Desta et al., (2013) used value chain
approach to identify opportunities and constraints in the value chain. Among the major
constraints of goat value chain in the area were shortage of adequate veterinary services, drugs
and equipment supply, weak vertical and horizontal linkages between producers and the actors,
lack of formal and adequate market information, seasonality of supply and demand for good
quality goats and shortage of supply of export quality animals. Similarly, sheep value chain
analysis conducted by Kidanu et al., (2013) used value chain approach to identify opportunities
and constraints in the value chain. Accordingly, the major actors in the value chain of sheep
are farmers, small traders, large traders, butchers/hotel/restaurant owners, export abattoirs,
farmers buying for breeding purposes and consumers. The study also found that the producers‟
share of final price was the least when the animal sold to hotels by passing through small
traders. This channel was less efficient than when animals are sold to butchers and export
abattoirs. In terms of value added, hotels and butchers add more value to sheep than traders
and exporters among the constraints related to input supply, production and marketing of sheep
value chain analysis were shortage of veterinary services and drug supply, feed shortage, high
incidence of disease and parasites, lack of vertical and horizontal linkage of sheep producers
and seasonality of demand for sheep.

The study conducted on analyzing beef cattle value chain in Konso district SNNP Region,
Ethiopia (Gesese and Legesse, 2015): the supplied quantity of beef cattle in to markets are
affected by access to veterinary service, household income, and distance from the nearest
market and access to credit significantly.

A study conducted on small ruminant value chain analysis by (Zemeda, 2016) used value chain
approach to map and identify the actors participating in the small ruminant value chain and
their distribution of benefits, opportunities and constraints in the value chain.
The study found that the producers‟ share of final prices are higher when the animal are sold
to hotels/restaurants and butchers passing through small traders and large traders. Among the
Major constraints of small ruminant value chain in the area are shortage of adequate Veterinary
services, drugs and equipment supply, weak vertical and horizontal linkages Between
producers and the actors, lack of formal and adequate market information and Seasonal

8
accordingly, the major actors in the value chain of sheep are producers, collectors, small
traders, large traders, hotels / butchers /, export abattoirs and individual consumers.

According to Beyene and Anja, (2018), research conducted on Sheep Production and
Marketing System: The Case of Sodo Zuria District Wolaita Zone Southern Ethiopia. Sheep
marketing was constrained by the absence of market-oriented production system, lack of
market information and seasonality of market price. Presence of credit facilities, availability of
farm labor and high demand of sheep and sheep products were among the major opportunities
for sheep production in the study area. On the other hand, lack of supplementary feeds shorting
of grazing land and prevalence disease were the major constraints to sheep production.

A study conducted on Factors affecting the intensity of market participation of smallholder

sheep producers in northern Ethiopia (Dubale and Yonnas, 2021): used Poisson regression
model showed that the age of household head, education of household head, number of sheep
owned, selling price of sheep, market access, distance to the nearest market, availability of
grazing land, and availability of feed appeared to be significant in determining the intensity of
sheep market participation significantly.

According to Nigus et al., (2021), Analysis of Sheep Value Chain in Basona Werena District.
Feed shortage, sheep diseases, lack of linkage between Debre Brihan Blanket Factory and
farmers, lack of improved sheep rams and low awareness of farmers on market-oriented sheep
production were the major constraints of sheep production in the study area. On the other hand,
government’s commitment to increase meat export, increment of export abattoirs, high demand
of live sheep and sheep meat in both domestic and gulf countries and geographical location of
the study area were the major opportunities. Regarding to factors that affect quantity of
livestock supplied to the market, different studies used multiple linear regression for different
agricultural commodities.

2.6. Conceptual Framework

The conceptual framework of value chain analysis is highly relevant to agricultural value
chains because agricultural value chains are critically defendant on environmental resources.
Based on literature review, conceptual framework outlines various factors which can be taken
into consideration in this study, with an emphasis on factors affecting quantity of sheep
supplied to the market (For example, Figure.1).
Personal and Demographic factors such as age, sex, and family size are important factors in
sheep value chain. Economic factors similar to farmer experience, off farm activities, education
9
level and livestock ownership can also affect quantity of sheep supply to the market. On the
other hand, institutional factors like access to water, access to credit, access to extension
services, and access to market information, access to veterinary service and distance to the
market can strongly affect sheep supply to the market. The conceptual framework applied for
this study is represented as follows.

Figure 1: Conceptual framework

Source: Own design from literature reviewed, 2023

10
 3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.1. Description of the Study Area

Girar jarso is one of the administrative Districts found in north Shewa zone of Oromia national
regional state and located at 114 km from Addis Ababa. The annual rain falls and temperature
of the district rain falls range 793-1443mm and 10–32-degree Celsius respectively. The area
found at altitudes of 2750 m.a.s.l which located highland accounting 42 percent, lowland 23
percent. The woreda has an estimated total population of 67312, of whom 34467are men and
32845are women (CSA, 2017). Girar jarso woreda consists of people with different ethnic
groups such as Oromo and Amhara. The majority of the people in the area belong to Oromo
ethnic group speaks Afan Oromo while the rest belong to the Amhara ethnic group and speaks
Amharic. Commonly, people living degas and woine dega areas speak afan Oromo while
Amharic is spoken by people living in kola areas. A survey of the land of the district shows
40% arable or cultivable (32% are planted with cereals), 23.1% pasture, 8.7% forest and the
remaining 28.2% is considered swampy, mountainous or otherwise unusable. The livestock
populations in the district include 107,550cattle, 80,171shoat and 26783 equine and 85926
poultry. The main crops grown in the area are wheat, barley, teff and pulse based on their higher
respective. Livestock production contributes a significant amount to the livelihood of the rural
population for food and as a source of income. Out of the total livestock population that existed
in the district, sheep accounted for the largest share(GJWOA, 2017).

Figure 2: Location of the study area: Source: GIS (2020)

3.2. Types, Sources and Methods of Data Collection
Qualitative and quantitative data was collected from both primary and secondary sources.
Primary data were collected from the respondents by interviewing randomly selected sheep
11
Producers using the questionnaires which are prepared for the respondents; and visual
observations and other primary sources include traders, hotels and restaurants, butchers, and
consumers using a pre-tested semi-structured questionnaire for each group. In addition to the
primary data to be gathered from these sources, supplementary information from other
secondary sources were also gathered from various published and unpublished documents. The
main sources of secondary data were including reports from different organizations like CSA
(Central Statistical Agency), Girar Jarso Woreda Agricultural Office, article review, journals
and different websites.

3.3. Sampling Size and Sampling Technique

A three-stage sampling procedure was used to draw sheep producing smallholder farmers. In
the 1st stage from North Showa Zones, Girar Garso Woreda was selected purposively because
it is potential in the production of sheep. In the 2nd stage, depending on the production potential
of sheep producers’ 1 kebeles (turban ashe) from 17 kebeles was selected purposively. In the
3rd stage, about 71 sampled households were selected randomly using probability proportionate
size. The number of sample households was determined by using the formula given by Yamane
(1967). Accordingly, the required sample size, a confidence interval of 90% with a level of
precision equal to 10% is used to obtain a sample size required which represents a true
population. The sample size was mathematically calculated as follows:

𝑁
𝑛= … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … . (1)
1 + 𝑁(𝑒)2

Where, N=target population

n= sample size that would be utilized for the research use

e=margin error (error tolerance) 10%

Total sample size of the kebele: 𝑛 = 250

= 71
1+250(0.1)2

The total sample size was 71. In addition, data from traders and consumers were also collected.
It is obvious that taking sample from unknown number of populations randomly is impossible
due to absence of recorded list of trader’s population in the study area. Therefore, a purposive
sampling technique was used to select 20 traders (13(8 large traders and 5 small traders), 3
butchers, 4 hotels/restaurants) and 15 consumers.

12
3.4. Methods of Data Analysis

3.4.1 Descriptive Analysis

Descriptive statistics and econometric models were used to analyze the data was collected from
sheep producers, collectors, traders, hotels/restaurants, butchers, and consumers. Descriptive
statistics such as frequency, mean, percentage, and standard deviation was used. Since
descriptive statistics help one to have clear picture of socio-economic and socio-demographic
situations of the respondents.

3.4.2. Econometric analysis

In this study, multiple linear regression model was employed to survey data to analyze

factors that affect quantity of sheep supplied in the market in the study area because all

sheep producers participated in the market and STATA version 13 was used. This requires

for the selection of multiple regression model. This model is also selected for its simplicity

and practical applicability (Greene, 2000). Based on literatures, sheep supply model

estimated in this study took the following form.

𝑌 = 𝛽0 + 𝛽𝑖 𝑋𝑖 + 𝑈𝑖 … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … . (2)

Where: Y = quantity of sheep supplied to market

β0 =Intercept βi= coefficient of ith independent variable to be estimated

𝑌 = 𝛽0 + 𝛽1 𝑋1 + 𝛽2 𝑋2 + ⋯ + 𝛽12 𝑋12 + 𝑈𝑖 … … … … … … … … … . (3)

X1 = SEX , X2 = AGE, X3 = MKINF, X4 = EXT, X5 = DIST, X6 = EDUC

X7 = CREDIT, X8 = EXPR, X9 = OFARM , X10 = FAMSZ, X11 = TLU, X12 = VET

Ui= unobserved disturbance term

To detect multi-collinearity problem for continuous variables, variance inflation factor

(VIF) was used. VIF can be defined as:

1
𝑉𝐼𝐹 = … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … (4)
1 − 𝑅𝑗

Where, Rj is the multiple correlation coefficients between explanatory variables.

13
As a rule of thumb, Gujarati (2004) states that if the VIF value of a variable exceeds 10,

which was happen if Rj (explained variation) exceeds 0.90, then, that variable is said to be

highly collinear. Therefore, for this study, variance inflation factor (VIF) has been used to

detect multi-collinearity problem for continuous variables. Multi-collinearity of continuous

variables can also be tested through Tolerance. Tolerance is 1 (Rj=0) if Xi is not correlated

with the other explanatory variable, whereas if it is zero (Rj =1) it is perfectly related to other

explanatory variables. Tolerance can be calculated as the reciprocal of VIF.

On the other hand, contingency coefficient was used to check multi-collinearity of discrete

(dummy) variables. It measures the relationship between the variables of a cross tabulation.

The value ranges between 0 - 1, with 0 indicating no association between variables and

value close to 1 indicating a high degree of association between variables. The decision

criterion is (CC <0.75). Contingency coefficient can be computed as follows:

χ2
𝐶𝐶 = √ … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … . . (5)
𝑁+χ2

Where, CC is contingency coefficient, χ 2 is chi-square value and N is total sample size.

The decision criterion with the contingency coefficient is that if the value of CC is greater

than 0.75, the variables are said to be collinear (CC > 0.75).

3.5. Definition of Variables and Working Hypothesis

3.5.1. Dependent variables
Quantity Supplied (QTSUPP): It is a continuous dependent variable that measures the
actual supply of sheep to the market measured in TLU during the year of 2023.

3.5.2. Independent variables

Age of Household Head (AGE): Age is a continuous variable and is measured in years. Older
people tend to more sheep supply to the market because of family responsibilities and need to
improve their living standards (Zelalem, 2010). It is not expected positive or negative
relationship between age and quantity supply to the market. There is no prior expectation.

14
Sex of household (SEX): This is a dummy variable, which takes a value of 1 if the household
head is male and 0, otherwise. Literature indicate that female-headed households have less
access to improved technologies, land, and extension services as compared to male headed
households. The study of finding by Betselot (2012) who found that sex of the household head
positively and significantly influenced honey market supply. Therefore, this variable was
expected to have positive relation with quantity of sheep supplied to the market.

Access to market information (MKTINF): This is dummy variable, which takes a value of 1
if the household head has access to price information and 0, otherwise. Farmers marketing
decisions are based on market price information, and poorly integrated markets may convey
inaccurate price information, leading to inefficient product movement. Farmers marketing
decisions are based on updated information available on the market. Bedilu et al., (2014) found
that access to milk market information increase the probability of marketed milk volume.
Therefore, this variable was expected to have positive relation with quantity of sheep supplied
to the market.

Distance to the nearest livestock market (DIST): It is a continuous variable that measures
the distance of the sheep producer household from the nearest sheep market and it is measured
in hours of walking time. The closer the sheep market, the lesser would be the transportation
charges, reduced walking time, and reduced other marketing costs, better access to market
information and facilities. This improves return to labor and capital; increases farm gate price
and the incentives to participate in economic transaction. According to Gebremedhin et al.,
(2015), far from livestock market decreases the participation of small ruminant selling.
Therefore, in this study, distance from nearest sheep market was expected to have negatively
relation with quantity of sheep supplied to the market.

Education level of the household head (EDUC): It is a continuous variable defined as the
level of grades or schooling attained by household head. Education increases farmers‟ ability
to get and use information, broadens farmers‟ intelligence and enables them to perform the
farming activities intelligently, accurately and efficiently. Moreover, better educated farmers
tend to be more innovative and are therefore more likely to adopt the marketing systems. Sheep
producers who have better knowledge are expected to be early adopters. Studies conducted by
Assefa (2009) conducted research on market chain analysis of honey in Atsbi Wembrta district,
Eastern Zone of Tigray Regional State, and also, Samuel Sarka. 2014. Market Chain Analysis
of Honey. The case of Sodo Zuria District, Southern Ethiopia. MSc. thesis, Haramaya

15
university, Haramaya, Ethiopia found that level of education was positively related with
marketed surplus. Therefore, this variable was expected to have positive relation with quantity
of sheep supplied to the market.

Access to credit (CREDIT): This is a dummy variable, which takes a value of 1 if the
household head has access to credit and 0, otherwise. Access to credit would enhance the
financial capacity of the farmer to purchase sheep. Gebremedhin et al., (2015) found that use
of credit services increases the probability of small ruminant market participation. Therefore,
access to credit was expected to have positive relation with quantity of sheep supplied to the
market.

Experience of the household in sheep production (EXPR): It is a continuous variable and

measured in the number of years of experience in sheep production. This is in line with Zelalem
(2010) who illustrated that farmer’s experience increased the number of sheep sold by the
household during the one-year period. Therefore, this variable was expected to have positive
effect on quantity of sheep to the market.

Off farm income (OFARM): It is a continuous variable measured in terms of amount of

income obtained income from off activities. Through improving liquidity, this income makes
the household to expand production and the probability of participating in the market and sheep
supply will increase. According to Zemeda (2016), off farm income increased the amount of
small ruminant supplied to market. Therefore, this variable was expected to have positive effect
to sheep production and quantity of sheep supplied to the market.

Family size (FAMSZ): This variable is a continuous variable measured in adult equivalent.

Families with more household members tend to have more labor which in turn increases

sheep production and then increase quantity of sheep supplied to the market. According to

Woldemichael (2008), family size affected the milk production and marketed milk volume

positively.

Other livestock owned (OLIVSTO): It is a continuous independent variable indicating total

livestock holding of the household measured in tropical livestock unit, which excludes sheep.
Households with larger total livestock unit size are supposed to be less concerned about the
sheep. Zemeda (2016) found that farmers with more number of livestock other than small
ruminant tend to disregard the importance of small ruminant as means of cash generating
16
activity. Other livestock production was assumed to have a negatively significant effect to the
supply of sheep to the market.

Veterinary services (VET): Sheep are very prone to livestock disease and needs proper
management and timely treatment. Veterinarians can comment the farmers to use
recommended drug sources and type or even can supply themselves to the farmers. Gezahagn
(2015) found that receiving veterinary service for beef cattle increase the probability of supply
their product in markets. Also, Embaye (2010) found availability of veterinary service
minimize loss of livestock.

Frequency of extension visit (EXT): It is a continuous variable measure by the number of

visits in the year made by extension agent. Extension access was assumed to have a positive
significant effect to the supply of sheep to the market, because a farmer who has access to
extension service will have the skills or knowledge needed to properly manage their sheep’s.

Table 1: Summary of variables description and hypothesis

abbreviation Explanation category Measurement sign

1 Dependent variable
QUSSUPP Quantity of sheep supply to the Continuous in TLU
market
2 Independent variable
AGE Age of Household Head Continuous In years -/+

SEX Sex household head Dummy 0 if female; 1 male -/+

MKTINF Access to market information Dummy 1 = Yes 0=No +

EXT Frequency to extension Continuous Number of +

Contact contacts

DIST Distance to nearest Market Continuous Hour _

EDUC Education level of household Continuous Years of schooling +

Head
CREDIT Access to credit Dummy 1 = Yes 0=No +

EXPR Farming experience of Continuous Number of years +

17
 household head

OFARM Off arm income Continuous Amount +

FAMSZ Family size Continuous No of people _ /+
TLU Livestock ownership Continuous TLU _

VET Access to veterinary services Dummy 1=Yes, 0=No +

Source: Literature review (2023)

18
 4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

This section deals with the major outcomes of the study. It is divided into four main sections.
The first section deals with descriptive statistics of the sample households. The second section
presents value chain analysis of sheep which includes actors and their roles, value chain map.
The third section presents results of econometric analyses which contain factors affecting
quantity of sheep supplied to the market by using multiple linear regression model. The fourth
section deals constraints and opportunity of sheep production and marketing.

4.1 Descriptive statistics

4.1.1 Demographic characteristics of producers

Analyzes variables used to describe mean, maximum, minimum, frequency and percentages of
sampled households in study area to discuss their demographic characteristics.

Table 2: Demographic characteristics of producers

SEX Freq. Percent Cum.
Femal 12 16.90 16.90
Male 59 83.10 100.00
Total 71 100.00
Source: Own survey computation (2024)

As shown in table 2, out of total household’s head interviewed 83.1% were male headed
households while 16.9% were female headed households. In study area those female headed
household not equally participating in supplying sheep for the market with male headed
households due to there are different social factors limiting women to participate in supplying
sheep for the market in large amount and lack of empowering women on cash livestock.

Table 3: socio-economic characteristics of producers

Variable Obs Mean Std. Dev. Min Max.

AGE 71 47.85915 13.25928 26 77

EDU 71 3.507042 2.110337 0 8
FAMSIZ 71 4.760563 2.387257 1 10
EXPE 71 22.90141 10.29862 4 50
OFFARM 71 16708.73 8588.703 16000 40000
TLU 71 3.93662 2.635255 0 12.55
EXT 71 1.34 2.5 1 4
Source: Own survey computation, (2024)

19
Age of household head (AGE)

Age is one of the important characteristics of the community. It reflects on the productivity of
the farmer as it has a bearing on the overall health situation within the community. It has a
bearing on the employment pattern, spatial mobility and quality of work done. Age plays a
crucial role in any kind of business activities particularly in agriculture, because the use of child
labor on the farms is quite high. Accordingly, the minimum and maximum age of the sample
farmers were 26 and 77 years respectively with mean age of 47.85 years (table 3).

Education (EDU)

Educational status of the household head can influence how household head accepts new idea
of production and searches for efficient markets for their products. It can affect attitudes of
farmers towards adoption of new technologies and ways of thinking toward the advantage of
using new technology for their economic improvements. Education can also contribute to
decision-making processes that alter the paths people take in life. Educational status of the
sample household heads in the study area ranges from illiteracy (0 grades) to grade 8 completed
(Table 4).

Family size (FAMSZ)

The mean family size of the total sample respondents was around 4.76 people, with a standard
deviation of approximately 2.39. The family sizes in the dataset range from 1 to 10 people.

Experience in sheep production (EXPE)

The sampled respondents have an average of 22 years of farming experience in sheep

production with a standard deviation of 10.3 (Table 3). In study area those farmers having more
experience are more knowledgeable on efficient market outlet selection and producing large
quantity of sheep which helps them to increase sheep supplied for market than those less
experienced farmers.

Livestock holdings (TLU)

Livestock is the main source of household farm income in study area, that means those
household owned large number of animals were earned income by selling livestock and their
products which directly contributes for purchasing agricultural input and family expenses and
leads farmers to produce sheep in large amount and supply for the market in large quantity.

20
From sampled households the maximum and mean of livestock owned were 12.56 and 3.93
TLU respectively and refer (Table 3).

Number of extensions contact (EXT)

Currently in Ethiopia the government has been attempted to fill the required knowledge and achieve
food self-sufficiency in the country by placing in each Kebele administration three development agents
and built a farmer training center to increase the quantity of sheep production and market surplus.
Development agents are assigned as better source of extension services for farmers at kebele level that
strengthens intensive method of extension work. The questionnaire pointed out that some development
agent misses to deliver technical advice to farmers at wanted time. From the sampled households the
minimum and maximum number of farmers contact with extension agents is 1 and 4 times respectively
with a mean contact of 1 times monthly (Table 3).

4.1.2 Institutional factors

Credit Services (CRDT)

Among sampled household heads 61.97% of respondents are non-users and 38.03% are users
of credit service from the available sources (Table 4). However, the credit provision is based
on group collateral but farmers are not much interested in this way in order not to pay for
defaulters in their group.

Access to Marketing information (MKINF)

Marketing information are essential factors in promoting competitive markets and improving
agricultural sector development. A well-organized market intelligence information system
helps all the producers and traders freely interact with one another in arriving at prices. Among
sampled households 67.61% of household heads are not access to market information while
32.39% has access to market information from neighbors, radios, and traders on prices, quality,
and market demands for sheep products (Table 4). Most of farmers were raised problem of lack
of market information regarding price of sheep, which means there is information asymmetry
problem between traders and farmers. Always traders are price informed and farmers are not
informed, this means according to response of questionnaire sheep is not market driven which
leads price fluctuations and provides unfair price for farmers.

21
Table 4: Institutional factors

Variables Frequency Percent

Not credit users 44 61.97

Credit users 27 38.03

Not Access to market information 48 67.61

Access to market information 23 32.39

Not Access to veterinary service 29 40.85

Access to veterinary service 42 59.15

Source: Own survey computation, (2024)

4.1.3 Demographic and socio-economic characteristics of traders

Demographic characteristics of traders in terms of age, household size, experience, sex and
education were summarized in (Table 5). The average family size of the traders is 5.27 persons
and ranges from 2 to 11. The average age of traders was 39 years and ranges from 19 to 60
years. The traders have an average of 16.42 years of experience in sheep trading (ranging from
1 to 36 years trade experience). The survey further indicates that 65% of the sample traders
were males while 35% of them were females. This implies that both females and male’s
participation in sheep trading was high. The age composition of traders was between the age
group 18 to 65 which is the productive age group. With regard to the level of education of
traders, the survey results showed that about 27.3% of the respondents are illiterate (0 grade)
while 72.7% were literate (Table 5).

Table 5:Demographic characteristics of sampled trader

Variables Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation

Age of traders in years 19 60 38.55 11.19
Household size 2 11 5.27 2.06
Education status of 0 12 4.13 4.01
traders
Experience in sheep 1 36 16.42 10.5
trading
Sex of traders Frequency Percent
Female 7 35
Male 13 65
Total 20 100.0
Source: Own survey computation (2024)

22
Socio-economic characteristics of traders include financial assets such as initial capital,
working capital, source of capital and source of loan. As depicted in Table 6, the average initial
capital of sampled sheep traders was birr 40000 with ranges from 25,000 to 150,000birr. With
regard to current working capital the survey result shows in 2024 average working capital of
sampled sheep traders were birr 65,000birr ranges from 45,000 to 250,000 birr (Table 6)

Table 6: Financial Capital of sampled traders

Variable Mean Std. Dev. Min Max.

Working capital in 2023 65000 311000.67 45000 250000
Initial capital 40000 185000.25928 25000 150000
Source: Own survey computation (2024)

Source of working capital for sampled traders were from loan and own. The
study result indicated that about50 % of sampled traders were using their own
capital whileabout20 % through loan and 30% were from both (Table 7).
Table 7:Source of working capital for sample traders

Source Frequency Percent

Loan 4 20
Own 10 50
Both 6 30
Total 20 100.0
Source: Own survey computation (2024)

Table 8below summarizes that source of loan for sampled households in study
area and indicated that 50 % of traders were not loan user, 20% were took loan
from microfinance institution, 25.5% from banks, and 30% took from relatives/
family.
Table 8:Source of loan for sampled traders

Source Frequency Percent

Not user of loan 10 50
Microfinance institution 4 20
Relatives 6 30
Total 20 100.0
Source: Own survey computation (2024)

4.1.4 Demographic and socio-economic characteristics of consumers

The survey results as it is indicated in (Table 9), 7 (46.7%) sampled consumers were females
and the remaining 8(53.3%) were males. The respondent’s age ranges from 28 to 47 years with
an average of 37.33 year. The average family size of the consumers is 5.13 persons and ranges
from 3 to 8. The educational level of consumers results shows that 26.7% were illiterate, 73.3%
23
were literate. Socio economic characteristics of consumer as indicated in (Table 9), shows that
an average monthly income of consumer was 5870 ranging from 800 to 25000 birr.

Table 9:Demographic Characteristics of consumers

Variables Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation

Education status 0 12 4.1 4.23
Household size 3 8 5.13 1.81
Age of consumer in 28 47 37.33 5.49
years
Sex Frequency Percent
Female 7 46.7
Male 8 53.3
Total 15 100.0
Source: Own survey computation (2024)

Also, an average monthly income spent on sheep consumption by consumers was 1500 ranging
from 100 to 200. So, the study result indicated that the proportion of consumer income spent
on sheep consumption by consumer was 9.97% of their monthly income.

Table 10:Socioeconomic characteristics of consumers

Income Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation

Monthly income of 8000 25000 16500 19641.43
consumers
Income spent on sheep 1000 2000 1500 796.16
consumption
Source of R e s p o n s e Frequency Percent
income Government work 4 26.7
Private 2 13.3
employment
Trade 5 33.3
Agriculture 1 6.7
Daily work 3 20.0
Total 15 100.0
Source: Own survey computation (2024)

The source of income for consumer in study area was from Government work, private
employment, trade, agriculture and daily work by 26.7%, 13.3%, 33.3%, 6.7% and 20%
respectively (Table 10).

24
4.2 Value Chain Analysis

4.2.1. Value chain actors and their roles in sheep value chain

According to the VCA framework, the actors in the value chain refer to those individuals or
entities who engage in a transaction for moving a product from inception to end use. They must
exchange money (or an equivalent service) as well as a product, which generally increases in
value with each transaction (Campbell, 2008). Based on the survey result, the primary sheep
value chain actors are those functions which have directly involved in the production,
processing and distribution of the product. These actors are input suppliers, producers,
collectors, small traders, large traders, butchers, hotels/restaurants and consumers.

Whereas the supportive actors are not directly involved in production and movement of the
product, these actors have effect on the quality, efficiency of production and distribution.
Support activities serve as the value chain’s enabling environment. These actors are finance
providers, research centers, government, cooperatives, district administrators, NGOs and the
likes. Actors and their roles are described as follows:

4.2.1.1. Primary actors

In the study area, sheep value chain actors are those individuals who exchange money as well
as animals or product, which generally increases value with each transaction. The primary
actors in sheep value chain in the study area were input suppliers, farmers, collectors, small
traders, large traders, hotels and restaurants, butchers and individual consumers.

Input suppliers: As survey result, 2023 indicated input suppliers are the first actor in the sheep
value chain and provide inputs to producers in study area. At this stage there are stockholders
who are involved to supply input like breeding stock and veterinary drugs which are essential
inputs in the production of sheep in the study area. Breeding stock comes from farmers' own
herds, traders and other farmers in the local market. Farmers get veterinary services from either
public or private veterinary service centers. OoARD and Private veterinary clinics and
pharmacies are the main source of input supply in the study area.

Producers: Sheep are sold at the farm gate and in markets in study area. Most of the time they
sale their sheep at market place because they didn’t get buyer as they want and the best price
when they sale at farm get in study area. Sheep producers are the major actors who perform
most of the value chain functions right from input preparation on their homesteads and

25
procurement of the inputs from other sources to marketing in the study area. The major value
chain functions that sheep producers perform in the study area include housing, feeding,
herding and breeding. Producers in the study area sell their sheep to collector, consumer, and
small trader at market places, and in the village. Producers do not always sell their animals at
the price they decided. Price is determined by negotiation of the seller and buyer, in this case
farmers and buyers (consumers, collectors, and small traders) in the study area (Survey result,
2023).

Collectors: Collectors are smallholder farmers who buy sheep from remote rural markets and
villages for the purpose of resale to small and large traders. They use either their own capital
or large and small trader’s money and their knowledge of local conditions and relationships to
buy animals.

Small traders: As survey result, 2023 indicated in the study areas, small traders are those
market agents that operate using their own capital and buy about 10-15 sheep per week. Small
traders buy all classes of sheep from producers and collectors and supply them to hotels,
butchers, individual consumers and big traders in the study area. Small traders are intermediate
traders who purchase sheep in a market from collectors and directly from producers and supply
them to butchers, large traders, hotels/restaurants and consumers in the study area.

Large traders: Large traders are mainly involved in buying sheep from collectors and small
traders in the study area. In most cases, they use collectors to buy large number of animals and
are actively involved in sheep marketing throughout the year. They buy larger number of sheep
than any other actors. They use Isuzu trucks to transport sheep and are permanent suppliers to
big hotels and restaurants in large town like Fitche and Addis Ababa (Survey result, 2023).

Hotels and restaurants: Hotels and restaurants are important actors in the sheep value chain
in the study area. They buy sheep from collectors, small traders and larger traders to slaughter.
When buying sheep, they give serious consideration to body size and condition. They slaughter
sheep and process them into different local dishes and sell them to their customers (Survey
result, 2023).

Butchers: Butchers are important actors in the sheep value chain for the study area and buy
sheep from producers, small traders and large traders to slaughter. When buying sheep, they
give serious considerations to body size and condition. They slaughter sheep and serve both

26
raw and cooked meat at their premises. In the study area, butchers sell raw meat for take away
on kilogram basis to individual consumers (Survey result, 2023).

Consumers: Individual consumers are actors that buy either live animals or meat for their own
household consumption. They buy live sheep from producers and small traders to slaughter for
religious festivals and special occasions. Individual consumers usually buy slaughter sheep for
special festivities, such as the Ethiopian New Year, Christmas, Easter, Ramadan and Arefa.
Some households also buy sheep for special occasions, such as weddings and other ceremonies.
The type and size of animals bought by individual consumers depends on their income and the
occasion for which the animal is required (Survey result, 2023).

Generally, wealthy households buy fattened male sheep, while relatively low-income groups
buy male yearlings. Individual consumers usually purchase live sheep from producers and
small traders, or they buy from any seller. Individual consumers in the study area also buy raw
meat from butchers on kilogram basis.

Farmers (for breeding purpose): Farmers are both producers and buyers of sheep in the study
area. They buy young female sheep mainly for breeding purpose when they need to increase
their herd size. Their preferred sources of animals are other farmers from known locations since
they want to make sure whether the animal will adapt to their situation. Regarding the time of
purchases, farmers usually buy animals after crop harvest from the end of November to
December. They get cash by selling crops and also availability of grazing pasture and crop
residues (Survey result, 2023).

4.2.1.2. Support institutions

Support institutions are those who provide supportive services including training and
extension, market information, veterinary services, financial and research services. Office of
Agriculture and Rural Development, and micro finance institution are main supporting
institutions that play a central role in the provision of such services in the study area.

Veterinary services: Farmers in the study area have access to veterinary services, but it is far
from the majority of the community as one veterinary service center. The survey result showed
that 59.15% of sample respondents have got veterinary services (Table 5). Unlike the
households nearer to towns, who can sometimes get veterinary service from private veterinary
pharmacies and specialists, majority of the households get veterinary service from OoARD.

27
All sampled farmers who have got veterinary services were from both OoARD and private
veterinary specialists and pharmacies.

Credit services: In the study area, micro finance institution and NGO have been identified as
sources for credit on a cash basis. The survey result showed that 38.03% of sample respondents
took credit (Table 4).

Market information: Before selling their animals, producers search for information about
market conditions through self-assessment by going to the markets and asking their neighbors.
The source of information was from the previous week’s market. The survey result, 2024
showed that 32.39% of sample respondents got market information. Out of 23 sampled farmers
who got market information from other farmers who are neighbors and friends and through
personal observation.

Development agents, DOoARD experts and NGO were the main sources of sheep extension
service in the study area. DOoARD through its DA is the major actor who provides information
and advisory service on sheep production. The type of extension service with regard to sheep
was technical advice and training applied to sheep production and marketing.

4.2.2 Value chain map of producers

In the study area, the general pattern in sheep market is for producers to sell to different traders
each time they go to the market. Producers do not have any longstanding customer relationship
with any of these buyers and they sell their products to anyone they can. Even the most frequent
buyers of sheep in the markets do not have any contractual supply agreement with producers.
This indicates absence of vertical linkage between producers and any buyer in the sheep value
chain in the district. This is mainly because the production system is not market-oriented and
producers are not following demand or the quality requirements of important market actors. As
a result, there is low level of transfer of skills and knowledge from the buyers to producers.
Overall, the map of the sheep value chain is buyer driven. The relationship between collectors
and small traders, collectors and large traders, small traders and large traders, small traders and
hotels/restaurants/butchers, large traders and hotels/restaurants/butchers, small traders and
consumers has complementarily of sorts since there is a long-standing mutual relationship
between them and those actors can sell their sheep on cash. In the study area, there are no
producers and buyer’s cooperatives. Farmers lack strong horizontal linkages with each other
and cause their poor bargaining power in the market. The horizontal linkages among traders

28
are primarily by the use of common trucks for transportation of sheep to the next level of the
market. Since they collect a small number of sheep

Figure 3: Value chain map of sheep in study area

Represent product flow Represent price flow Represent information flow

Source: Own survey, 2024

29
4.3. Econometric Analysis

4.3.1. Determinants of quantity of sheep supplied

Factors that affect supply of sheep to the market was estimated by using OLS model since all
respondents used for this study supplied their sheep to the market. Before running multiple
linear regression model, the hypothesized explanatory variables were checked for
multicollinearity problem using VIF for continuous variables and contingency coefficient (CC)
for discrete or dummy variables. As a rule of thumb, Gujarati (2004) states that if the VIF value
of a variable is less than 10 and CC is less than 0.75, which means multicollinearity problem
is not serious among the independent variables. Based on the above rule of thumb, the VIF and
the CC values are less than 10 and 0.75 respectively. The results for all VIF values 1.66 are
less than 10 and contingency coefficient value are under 0.4435 and over -0. 5338. Hence,
multi-collinearity was not a serious problem both among the continuous and discrete variables.
Heteroscedasticity refers to a statistical phenomenon characterized by the uneven distribution
of the variance of errors in a regression model across different levels of the independent
variables. In other words, it occurs when the variability of the residuals (or errors) is not
constant across the range of values of the predictors or the Prob>chi2 value are less than 0.05
(White, H. 1980). Breusch Pagan was used to test heteroscedasticity the result showed that
there was no problem of heteroscedasticity because of (chi2 (1) = 0.05, Prob>chi2 = 0.48). For
detail (Appendix Table 2, 3 and 4).

The OLS model estimated results of the variables that are expected to determine market supply
of sheep are presented in Table11. Out of 12 explanatory variables, 7 were found to
significantly influence the quantity of sheep supplied to the market. Accordingly, Sex, Family
size, Distance to the nearest market, Livestock ownership other than sheep, access to veterinary
service, and Education significantly affected the quantity of sheep supply.

Goodness of fit: the overall goodness of fit of the regression model is measured by the
coefficient of determination (R2). It tells what proportion of the variation in the dependent
variable, or regress and, is explained by the explanatory variable. R2 lies between 0 and 1, the
closer it is to 1, and the better is the fit. Hence, the overall model goodness of fit represented
by model count R2 for sheep market supply are very good that are 0.776 indicating that 77.6%
of the sample households were correctly predicted out of 71 sample household heads, as shown
table 11 and appendix 4.

30
Table 11: Determinants of quantity of sheep supplied (Result from OLS)

QUSSUP Coef. Std. Err. t P>|t| [90% Conf. Interval]

SEX .7733957 .3259726 2.37 0.021 .2285153 1.318276

AGE -.0240781 .014663 -1.64 0.106 -.0485881 .0004319
DESTA -.527319 .1786075 -2.95 0.005 -.8258709 -.2287671
EDU -.0193968 .0856094 -0.23 0.822 -.1624975 .1237039
MKTINF -.6418509 .307963 -2.08 0.042 -1.156627 -.1270745
EXT .1189972 .1528763 0.78 0.440 -.1365435 .3745379
CRED 2.268867 .3891878 5.83 0.000 1.618319 2.919415
TLU .2246427 .081461 2.76 0.008 .0884762 .3608091
EXPE .0000277 .0000108 2.57 0.013 9.69e-06 .0000458
OFFARM -1.02e-06 .0000211 -0.05 0.962 -.0000363 .0000342
FAMSIZ -.1634326 .0766384 -2.13 0.037 -.2915378 -.0353275
VET .2585472 .3262494 0.79 0.431 -.286796 .8038903
_cons 9.006022 1.485094 6.06 0.000 6.52361 11.48843

Number of obs = 71
F( 12, 58) = 16.82
Prob > F = 0.0000
R-squared = 0.7768
Adj R-squared = 0.7306
Root MSE = 1.1153

Source: model result, 2024.

Sex: Sex significantly and positively influenced value of sheep supplied to market at 5% level
of significance. The positive sign shows being a male headed household significantly increase
the number of sheep supplied to the market on average, by 0.77 TLU as compared to that of
female-headed households, keeping other variables constant at 5% level of probability. The
reason behind might be male were often responsible for the management and husbandry of
livestock, including sheep than female headed households. This is consistent with the finding
of Betselot (2012) who found that sex of the household head positively and significantly
influenced honey market supply. The authors stated as the reason that male headed households
tend to sell more volume than female one and this can be related with the weight carrying
capacity of female and usage of honey for home consumption.

31
Family size: It is the number of members living in a household. The variable affected value of
sheep supplied to market negatively and significantly at 1% significance level. The negative
effect of the variable shows that as the number of household members increased, more part of
sheep produce is allocated for household consumption. As the member of household increased
by one, number of sheep supplied to market decreased on average, by 0.163 TLU, holding other
variables constant. This is in line with the finding of Assefa (2009) who found those family
size of households are negatively and significantly influenced honey market supply.

Distance to the nearest market: These variable influences value of sheep markets negatively
and significantly at 1% significance level. Holding other explanatory variables constant, the
result shows that as the distance from the nearest market increased by one foot hour, the number
of sheep supplied to the market decreased on average by 0.527 TLU. This may be due to the
fact that the further the market increased trekking time, the higher would be the transportation
charges and other marketing costs, less access to market information and facilities. This is in
line with finding of Gebremedhin et al., (2015).

Livestock ownership other than sheep: This variable influenced farmers‟ supply sheep to
the marketing positively and significantly at 1% significance level. Producers who have large
number of livestock might consider their asset base as a means of securing any risk (lack of
market access and price decrease) associated with sheep production and marketing. As
livestock owned other than sheep increased by one unit the probability of the household to
supply sheep to the marketing increase on average by 0.22 TLU, holding other variables
constant. This is in line with the findings of Zelalem (2010) and Samuel (2014).

Access to credit: access to credit significantly and positively influenced value of sheep
supplied to market at 1% level of significance. Thus, holding other factors constant, on average
increases the amount of credit users increasing quantity of sheep supplied to the market on
average by 2.26 TLU. This is in line with finding of Gebremedhin et al., (2015), Assefa (2009).

Access to market information: it is unexpected result, because hypothesized before access to

market information of the household head affected market supply of sheep positively but the
result shows that negatively and significantly at 1% the reasons may be price volatility,
heightened competition, transparency issues, risk management complexities, information
overload, and disruption of traditional marketing channels. Thus, holding other factors
constant, on average increases access to market information decrease quantity of sheep
supplied to the market on average by 0.64 TLU. This contrary with Zelalem (2010) who
32
illustrated that farmer’s access to market information sheep supply by the household are
increase.

Experience of the household in sheep production: As it was hypothesized before Experience

of the household head in sheep production affected market supply of sheep positively and
significantly at 1%, thus, holding other factors constant, on average increases Experience of
the household head increases quantity of sheep supplied to the market on average by 0.007
TLU. This is in line with Zelalem (2010) who illustrated that farmer’s experience increased the
number of sheep sold by the household during the one-year period.

4.4 Constraints and Opportunities of sheep production and Marketing

4.4.1 Constraints and Opportunities of sheep production and Marketing of

producers
Sheep production is a major enterprise in Ethiopia's mixed-crop livestock system, providing
food, cash income, and manure for smallholder farmers. There are a number of factors that
affect agricultural productivity in general and sheep production in particular in the district.
Some of the major constraints in sheep production identified by the producers in the study areas
were feed shortages, disease and parasites, poor veterinary service, low genetic potential of
indigenous livestock, poor quality of live animals, lack of credit service and lack of extension
service. Among those the most serious problems in the production of sheep in the study was
disease. Lack of good management practices, in availability of feed supply and absence of good
sheep houses are the main causes of sheep disease in the study area. sheep disease also comes
from market as well as neighbor sheep producers; in the study area the most common disease
is pox virus or kemikim at its local name.

There were also sheep marketing constrains in the study area. The major market constraints as
identified by producers were lack of market information, price fluctuations, low bargaining
power, dishonesty, weak linkage between actors, low price, lack of demand. Basically, lack of
infrastructure like transportation absence of reliable and adequate information; some farmers
do not get timely market information upon which to base their marketing decisions; also, some
part time traders lake price information in order to decide when to buy and resale it. They
depend on other farmers and traders price information for marketing decisions; shortage of
supply or no marketable surplus from the producers, volatile market price, seasonal demand.

33
Some of the opportunities are; sheep are well-suited to the country's diverse agro-ecological
zones and can provide multiple benefits to the households. Sheep farming in the study area
offers a potential source of income through the sale of sheep meat, wool, and other by-products,
contributing to poverty reduction and livelihood improvement of household. Additionally,
sheep are known for their ability to utilize marginal lands and graze on various vegetation
types, making them a valuable asset in areas where agricultural land availability is limited.
Furthermore, sheep farming can enhance the ecological stability of rural areas, leading to
improved soil fertility and increased agricultural productivity.

4.4.2. Sheep marketing Constraints and opportunities of traders

Constraints of sheep marketing identified by traders are limited market information and
inadequate market linkages hinder the marketing activities of sheep traders. Lack of access to
timely and reliable market information makes it challenging for traders to make informed
decisions regarding pricing, demand trends, and market opportunities. Additionally, inadequate
market linkages restrict their ability to reach broader markets, limiting their potential for higher
sales volumes and profitability. Moreover, inadequate transportation infrastructure and high
transportation costs make it difficult for traders to transport sheep to distant markets, reducing
their market reach. Furthermore, the absence of well-defined grading and certification systems,
as well as inconsistent quality standards, hampers the ability of traders to meet the requirements
of formal markets and export markets.

There were also sheep marketing opportunities of traders. Sheep trading serves as an important
economic activity in the study area, providing employment and income generation for
individuals involved in the value chain. Traders can benefit from the availability of diverse
sheep breeds in rural areas, allowing them to meet the demands of different market segments.
They can engage in buying sheep directly from farmers and selling them to local markets or
urban centers where there is a higher demand for sheep meat. Additionally, traders can explore
value-added opportunities by establishing relationships with processors and other actors,
supplying sheep for butchers and hotel and restaurants or supplying to Addis Abeba and Fitche
markets. However, to fully realize these opportunities, traders may need support in terms of
market information, access to finance, transportation infrastructure, and training on quality
assurance and market standards.

34
 5. CONCLUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1. CONCLUSION

Generally, this study was aimed at evaluating value chain of sheep in Girar Jarso District
of Oromia national Regional State. Quantities of sheep supplied to market are found to
be important element in the study of sheep value chain. The data were generated from
both primary and secondary sources.

The analysis was made using descriptive statistics and econometric model. Multiple
linear regression was used to identify factors influencing sheep market supplied to
market of the sample households. Following this, the present study was initiated to
identify the major actors and their roles in sheep value chain, and determinants of
quantity of sheep supplied to the market. At the time of the survey, all sheep producer
are market participant. The study revealed that, producer, small traders, large traders,
butchers, hotel and restaurant owners, consumers are the main primary actors in sheep
value chain. The study also identified enablers of sheep value chain such as micro
finance institutions, NGO, and veterinary and government extension service providers
among others. Besides, the model result revealed that, quantity of sheep supplied was
affected negatively by family size, distance to the nearest market, access to market
information while sex, education, access to veterinary service, access to credit and
livestock ownership affected it positively. Finally, constraints and opportunity of sheep
production and marketing also identified. Based on the result identified by producers in
the study areas were feed shortages, disease and parasites, poor veterinary service, low
genetic potential of indigenous livestock, poor quality of live animals, lack of credit
service and lack of extension service are production constraints and lack of market
information, price fluctuations, low bargaining power, dishonesty, weak linkage
between actors, low price, lack of demand are major marketing constraints of producers.
And also limited market information and inadequate market linkages hinder the
marketing activities of sheep traders are the major challenge of sheep marketing of
traders.

35
5.2 RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on the study results following recommendations are drawn:

Education level of household head positively and significantly affected quantity of sheep
supplied. Therefore, developing the skills of farmers through training can increase quantity of
sheep supplied in sheep marketing. Ownership of livestock other than sheep significantly and
positively affected quantity of sheep supplied. The study suggested strengthening the existing
livestock production through improved health services, better livestock feed (forage) and
targeted credit in the area can subsidize sheep production too.

Distance from the nearest market significantly and negatively affected sheep market
participation. Therefore, developing market infrastructure such as building market places and
improving road to reduce trekking time, transportation costs and other marketing costs can
improve sheep market access and increase sheep supply to the market.

Access to market information of household head negatively and significantly affected quantity
of sheep supplied. To address these challenges in the future, embrace digital marketing tools
and platforms to reach new buyers and expand market reach. Cultivate a strong online presence
through social media, e-commerce platforms, or online marketplaces to connect directly with
consumers and reduce reliance on traditional intermediaries.

Family size significantly and negatively affected quantity of supply to market. Therefore,
health extension workers and other stakeholders need to give attention to strengthening and
leverage policies on improving rural family planning to enhance farmers “livelihood and
supply of sheep to market.

Quantity of sheep supply to the market affected positively and significantly by sex of household
head. To ensure equal participation and benefit from sheep value chain effort should be made
to encourage female sheep producers in order to increases sheep marketed so as to improve
their livelihood.

Efforts should be made to alleviate the main constraints that hindered sheep production that
requires investments in research and extension services, capacity building, improved animal
health services, market infrastructure development, and policy support to promote sustainable
sheep production and effective market linkages, and Addressing the constraints of traders
36
requires interventions such as improving market information systems, enhancing market
linkages, upgrading transportation infrastructure, and establishing quality assurance
mechanisms to enable sheep traders to access and compete in larger and more lucrative
markets. Further research should be conducted on mostly reproductive and productive
potential, and its improvement method of all indigenous breeds.

37
 6. REFERENCES

Abraham Tegeg. 2013.Value chain analysis of vegetables: The case of Habro and
Kombolcha Districts of Oromia Region. MSc. thesis, Haramaya University,
Haramaya, Ethiopia.
Ali Tegegne, Zekarias Shumeta and Zeleke Mekuriaw.2017. Factors Affecting Milk
Market Supply and Level of Supply by Smallholder Milk Producers: The
Case of Dessie Zuria District, South Wollo Zone, Ethiopia. Journal of
Marketing and Consumer Research, Vol.34
Aman Tufa, Adam Bekele and Lemma Zemedu. 2014.Determinants of small holder
commercialization of horticultural crops in Gemechis district, West
Hararghe zone, Ethiopia. African Journal of Agricultural Research, 9 (3):
310-319.
Assefa Abebe. 2009. Market chain analysis of honey production: in AtsbiWemberta
district, Eastern zone of Tigray. Thesis presented to the school of graduate
studies of Haramaya University, Ethiopia
Ashenafi, M., Addisu, J., Shimelis Mengistu, Hassen, H. and Legese Getachew.
2013.Analysis of sheep value chains in Doyogena, southern Ethiopia. Addis
Ababa:ICARDA. Barrett, C.B. 2007. Smallholder market participation:
concepts and evidence from eastern andsouthern Africa. FAO workshop on
staple food trade and market policy options for promoting development in
eastern and southern Africa, Rome.
Bedilu Demissie, Hussien Hamda and AdemKedir. 2014. Factors affecting camel and
cow milk marketed surplus: The case of eastern Ethiopia. African Journal
of Agricultural Science and Technology,2(2): 54-58.
Betselot Mesfin. 2012.HoneyValue Chain Analysis with Especial Emphasis to Ada‟a
Woreda, East Shoa Zone of Ethiopia.
Biruk Jagiso. 2015. Value Chain Analysis of Bee Honey and Credit Market
Participation of Bee Keepers: The Case of Damot Gale District, Southern
Ethiopia.
Beyene, A., & Anja, A. (2018). Sheep Production and Marketing System: The Case of
Sodo Zuria District Wolaita Zone Southern Ethiopia. International Journal
of Basic and Applied Sciences, 7(2), 69-74.
38
CSA (Central Statistical Agency), Agricultural
SampleSurvey2016/17.VolumeII.Report on livestock and livestock
characteristics (private peasant holdings). CSA, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Demerch Argaw. 2014. Marketing and quality management of hide and skin: The case
of TiyoandDigelu-Tijo Districtof Arsi zone Oromia Region. MSc. thesis,
Addis Ababa University, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Desta Daniel, Hados Haylay, Belay Sisay, Gizaw Solomon, Legese and Getachew
Tadesse.2013. Value chain analysis of Abergelle goat in Tanqua Abergelle
district, Central Zone of Tigray Region, Ethiopia. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
District report, (2020). District agriculture and rural development’s report on livestock
production and research.
Dubale Abate & Yonnas Addis | Pedro González-Redondo (Reviewing
editor) (2021) Factors affecting the intensity of market participation of
smallholder sheep producers in northern Ethiopia: Poisson regression
approach, Cogent Food &
Agriculture, 7:1, DOI: 10.1080/23311932.2021.1874154
E., Omini, G. E. and Adinya, B. I. 2013. Assessing the Extent of Commercialization of
Smallholding Farming Households in Cross River State, Nigeria. Journal of
Agriculture and Veterinary Science (IOSR-JAVS), Volume 4:49-55.
Embaye Kidanu. 2010. Analysis of butter supply chain: The case of Alamata and Atsbi-
Wonberta Districts of Tigray Region, Ethiopia.
EyobE, ZewuduA.2016. Review on live animal and meat export marketing system in
Ethiopia: challenges and opportunities. Sci.InnovativeRes.5(2):59-64.
Gebre Medhin Berhanu, Hoekstra D, Tegegne Azage., Shiferaw Kaleb and Bogale
Aklilu. 2015.Factors determining household market participation in small
ruminant production in the highlands of Ethiopia. LIVES Working
Paper2.Nairobi, Kenya.
Genanew Bekele and Alemu Mekonnen. 2019.Investments in land conservation in the
Ethiopian highlands: A household plot-level analysis of the roles of poverty,
tenure security and marketing centives. Environment for Development,
Discussion Paper Series, March 2010.
Gesese, G., & Legesse, B. (2015). Beef Cattle Value Chain Analysis in Konso District,
Southern Nations, Nationalities and Peoples’ Region, Ethiopia (Doctoral
dissertation, Haramaya University).
39
GezehagnGesese. 2015. Beef cattle value chain analysis in Konso District, Southern
Nations Nationalities and Peoples Region, Ethiopia. MSc. Thesis, Haramaya
University, Haramaya, Ethiopia. ILRI (International Livestock Research
Institute), Nairobi, Kenya.
Gizaw Solomon, Abegaz Solomon., Risch kowsky, B., Haile, A., Mwai, A.O. and
Dessie, T.2013.Review of sheep research and development projects in
Ethiopia, Nairobi, Kenya: International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI).
Gizaw Solomon., Tegegne Azage. Gebremedhin Berhanu And Hoekstra, Dirk. 2011.
Sheep and goat production and marketing systems in Ethiopia:
Characteristics and strategies
GizawSolomon., vanArendonk, J.A.M., Komen, H., Windig, J.J. and Hanott, O.,
2007.Population structure, genetic variation and morphological diversity in
indigenous sheep of Ethiopia.
GJWOA (Girar jarso Woreda Office of Agriculture), 2014. Annual report for livestock
production.
Greene, W.H. 2000.Econometric Analysis.4th ed. Prentice Hall International, Inc.,
International edition, U.S.A. p1004.
Gujarati, D.N.2004. Basic Econometrics.4th ed. McGraw-Hill, New York.p563-636.
Hellin,J.,Jupiter, N.,and Pippa .Ch .T.,2010. Using qualitative market mapping to
explore Aflatoxin contamination along the Maize and Groundnut Value
Chains, Improving Lives in Africa, Working Paper 3; October 2010
JemaHaji, 2008.An economic efficiency and marketing performance of vegetables in
Eastern and Central part of Ethiopia. Doctoral thesis, Nov., 2008, Sweden.
KidanuEmbaye.Regassa Mengistu., Rischkowsky. B and Legese Getachew. 2013.
Analysis of sheep value chain in
AtsbiWoreda,TigrayRegion,Ethiopia.AddisAbaba:ICARDA.
Legese Getachew and Fadiga Mohamed. 2014. Small ruminant value chain
development in Ethiopia: Situation analysis and trends.ICARDA/ILRI
Project Report, Nairobi, Kenya.
Legese Getachew and Hordofa, D. 2011. Value chain analysis of small ruminant sub-
sector in Oromia and Southern Nation Nationalities Regional States. Addis
Ababa, Ethiopia.
Legese Getachew, Haile Aynalem., Duncan, Alan, Dessie Tadelle., Gizaw Solomon.
And Risch kowsky, B.2014.Sheep and goat value chains in Ethiopia: A
40
 synthesis of Opportunities and constraints. ICARDA/ILRI Project Report,
Nairobi, Kenya.
M4P (Making Markets Work Better for the Poor). 2008. Making value chains Work
Better for the Poor: a tool book for practitioners of value chain analysis.
Version3.
M4P project, UK. Mather, D., Boughton, D., and Jayne, T.S. 2011. Smallholder
heterogeneity and maize market participation in Southern and Eastern
Africa: Implications for investment strategies to Mengesha M and Tsega
W.2012. Indigenous Sheep Production in Ethiopia: Ethiopian Institute of
Agricultural Research, DebreZeit Agricultural Research Center, Addis
Ababa, Ethiopia Addis Ababa University, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine,
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Meryem Kuru (2013). Analysis of Cow Milk Market Chain: The Case of Sululta
District, Oromia Special Zone Surrounding Finfinnee, Ethiopia.
Negassa, A. and Jabar, M., 2008. Livestock ownership, commercial off-take rates and
their determinants in Ethiopia. Research Report №9. ILRI (International
Livestock Research Institute), Nairobi, Kenya. 52pp.
Negassa, A., Rashid,S.and Gebremedhin Birhanu.2011.Livestock production and
marketing. Ethiopia Strategy Support ProgramII (ESSPII).
NigusTekletsadik, Adem Kedir, Kedir Amare. Analysis of Sheep Value Chain in
Basona Werena District, North Shewa Zone, Amhara Regional State of
Ethiopia. Journal of World Economic Research. Vol. 10, No. 2, 2021, pp.
48-61. doi: 10.11648/j.jwer.20211002.13
Quader, M. 2012. Value chain analysis of black tiger shrimp culture in Cox's Bazar
District, Bangladesh.
Samuel Sarka. 2014. Market Chain Analysis of Honey. Solomon Abegaz, Girma Abebe
and Kassahun Awgichew. 2011. Sheep and Goat Production Systems in
Ethiopia. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: Ethiopia Sheep and Goat Productivity
Improvement Program (ESGPIP).
TsedekeKocho. 2007.Production and marketing of sheep and goats in Alaba District,
Southern Nations Nationalities and Peoples Region. M.Sc. thesis, Hawassa
University, Hawassa, Ethiopia.
UNIDO (United Nations Industrial Development organization Vienna), 2009.Argo-
Value Chain analysis and Development, The UNIDO Approach. Somano.
41
 2008.Dairy marketing chain analysis: The case of Shashemane Hawassa and
Dale districts.
Usman Mohammed. 2021. Analysis of live sheep market chain: the case of legambo
district, South Wollo Zone, Amhara National Regional State, Ethiopia.
Unpublished.
White, H. (1980). A heteroskedasticity-consistent covariance matrix estimator and a
direct test for heteroskedasticity. Econometrica, 48(4), 817-838. milk shed,
southern Ethiopia.
Wondu wossen Demis. 2014. Determinants of fruit and vegetable commercialization
among rural households: - The case of Bora district, East Shewa zone
Oromia region. Master Thesis St. Mary’s University, Addis Ababa,
Ethiopia.
Worku, A., & Dereje, M. (2017). A Review on Current Status of Small Ruminant Meat
Production Comparison Yield and Carcass Characteristics in
Ethiopia. Advances in Life Science and Technology, 58, 25-33.
Zahra, A., Mulema, A., Colverson, K., Odongo, D., and Rischkowsky, B. 2014. A
review of Ethiopia small ruminant value chains from a gender perspective.
Nairobi: ILRI andICARDA.
Zelalem Gutu. 2010.Marketing of sheep in Horro-Guduru Wollega Zone of Oromia:
Price and Supply Analysis. Zemeda Desta. 2016.Value chain analysis of
small ruminant.

42
 7. APPENDICES
Table 12:Appendix 1, Conversion factors used to compute TLU

Animal category Conversion factor

Calf 0.25
Wean waned calf 0.34
Heifer 0.75
Cow 1
Horse 1.1
Donkey (adult) o.7
Donkey (young) 0 .35
Camel 0.25
Sheep (adult) 0.13
Sheep (young) 0.06
Goat (adult) 0.13
Goat (young) 0.06
Chicken 0.013
Source: Storcketal.,1991

Table 13:Appendix 2, VIF for multicollinearity diagnosis

Variable VIF 1/VIF

EDU 1.45 0.691
EXPR 1.22 0.792
FAMSZ 1.26 0. 819
EXT 1.14 0.875
OFARM 1.14 0.877
OLIVSTO 1.13 0.888
AGE 1.12 0.897
DIST 1.11 0.899
Mean 1.16

43
Table 14:Appendix 3, Contingency coefficient of discrete variables

SEX CREDIT VET MKINF

SEX 1.0000
CREDIT 0.3404 1.0000
VET -0.5338 -0.0536 1.0000
MKINF -0.1884 -0.1590 0.4435 1.0000

Table 15: Appendix 4, heteroscedasticity test result

44
Table 16: Appendix 5, model summary determinants of quantity of sheep market supply (OLS
estimation)
. regress QUSSUP SEX AGE DESTA EDU MKTINF EXT CRED TLU EXPE OFFARM FAMSIZ VET, level(90)

Source SS df MS Number of obs = 71

F( 12, 58) = 16.82
Model 251.037562 12 20.9197968 Prob > F = 0.0000
Residual 72.1455371 58 1.24388857 R-squared = 0.7768
Adj R-squared = 0.7306
Total 323.183099 70 4.61690141 Root MSE = 1.1153

QUSSUP Coef. Std. Err. t P>|t| [90% Conf. Interval]

SEX .7733957 .3259726 2.37 0.021 .2285153 1.318276

AGE -.0240781 .014663 -1.64 0.106 -.0485881 .0004319
DESTA -.527319 .1786075 -2.95 0.005 -.8258709 -.2287671
EDU -.0193968 .0856094 -0.23 0.822 -.1624975 .1237039
MKTINF -.6418509 .307963 -2.08 0.042 -1.156627 -.1270745
EXT .1189972 .1528763 0.78 0.440 -.1365435 .3745379
CRED 2.268867 .3891878 5.83 0.000 1.618319 2.919415
TLU .2246427 .081461 2.76 0.008 .0884762 .3608091
EXPE .0000277 .0000108 2.57 0.013 9.69e-06 .0000458
OFFARM -1.02e-06 .0000211 -0.05 0.962 -.0000363 .0000342
FAMSIZ -.1634326 .0766384 -2.13 0.037 -.2915378 -.0353275
VET .2585472 .3262494 0.79 0.431 -.286796 .8038903
_cons 9.006022 1.485094 6.06 0.000 6.52361 11.48843

45
 SALALE UNIVERSITY
COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE AND NATURAL RESOURCE
DEPARTMENT OF AGRIBUSINESS AND VALUE CHAIN
MANAGEMENT
Senior Research on: Analysis of Sheep Value Chain in Girar Jaro Woreda

Survey Questionnaires
Dear respondents, please support me by giving relevant information on this questionnaire. It
aims to get information on analysis of sheep value chain in Girar Jaro Woreda. The
questionnaire is prepared by students Muket Awoke, Tsegaye Kebede, and Yezin Atariku,
fourth-year Agribusiness and Value Chain Management department students at Salale
University for a senior research project in partial fulfillment of the Bachelor Degree of Science.
This questionnaire was prepared to generate information on the extent of the sheep value Chain
Analysis, analysis factors that affect quantity supplied as well as the major opportunities and
challenges of sheep production and marketing. Your attempt to answer all questions is highly
appreciated. I confirmed that all the data gathering was confidential. Finally, I convey my
special thanks for your concern, objectivity, and patience while filling out this questionnaire.

PRODUCERS INTERVIEW QUESTIONNAIRE

I. Background of the household

1. Sex of household head 1. Male 2. Female

2. Age of the household head______ (in years)

3. Marital status. 1. Single 2. Married 3. Widowed 4. Divorced

4. Religion of producer 1. protestant 2. Orthodox 3. Muslim 4. catholic 5. Other

(Specify)
5. Educational level of the household head__________ (grade attended)

6. Do you participate in sheep value chain practice? A. Yes B. No

7. What are your reasons for starting sheep value chain activity? -----------------------------------
----
8. How many sheep do you have supplied to the market? _______
9. Distance of your residence from the nearest market center: _____ km or _____ hours walk
46
 10. Experience on sheep producing______ (in years)

11. Livestock ownership

Animal category Number TLU

Ox
Cow
Bull
Calves
Weaned calves
Heifer
Goat (adult)
Goat (young)
Donkey (adult)
Donkey (young)
Horse
Mule
Chicken
Camel

12. What was your annual non-farm income (NFARM)?

birr/year.

I. Access to credit

1. Do you have access to credit? 1. Yes 2 No

2. From whom did you get credit? 1) Relative 2) Bank 3) microfinance

institution

4) Traders 5) NGO 6) friends 7) Peasant Association 8) if others

(specify)

II. Access to Information

1. Did you know the market prices before you sold your sheep? 1. Yes 2. No

2. Which institution was your first source of information about sheep marketing?
1. OoARD 4. Research center
47
 2. NGOs 5. Others, specify__________
3. Other farmers

III. Access to Veterinary Service

1. Did you get the service and drug on time? 1. Yes 2. No

2. How was the service and drug quality? 1. High quality 2. Low-quality

IV. Access to extension Service

1. Did you have an extension service for sheep production? 1=yes 0=no

2. If yes how many times does the extension agent contact you within a month?

1. One times 2 two times 3. Three times 4. Above three

V. What are the main sheep production and marketing constraints?

Thank You!!!

TRADERS INTERVIEW QUESTIONNAIRE

I. General Information

1.Name of trader: ___________ Age ____________Sex _____________

2. Marital status: 1. Single 2. Married 3. Divorced 4. Widowed

3. Total family size:______

4.Educational level of the respondent________

5. Main occupation:

1. Collector 2. Small trader 3. Large trader 4. Other ______

6. Religion of trader 1. protestant 2. Orthodox 3. Muslim4. catholic 5. Other

(Specify)
II. Financial capital

7. What was the amount of initial working capital when you started this business? --------

Birr.

8. What was the amount of your working capital in 2023? --------------------Birr.

48
9. What was the source of the working capital? 1. Own 2. Loan 3. Gift 4.

Share

5. If others (specify)

10. If it was loan, from whom did you borrow?1) Relative 2) Bank 3) microfinance

institution 4) Traders 5) NGO 6) friends 7) Peasant Association 8) if

others (specify)

11. The buyer of your sheep in 2023?

1. Large trader 2. Hotel and restaurant 5. Others _________

3. small traders 4. Butchers
12. Are there problems on sheep marketing? 1. Yes 2. No
13. What are the constraints related to sheep marketing?

CONSUMER INTERVIEW QUESTIONNAIRE

1. Name: ___________________________, Sex ______ Age ______

2. Marital status: 1. Single 2. Married 3. Widowed 4. Divorced

3. Education Status in years of formal schooling _________

4. Distance from nearest town in walking hours ______________

5. Means of income generation ____________________

6. Monthly income of consumer____________

7. Experience in sheep consumption_________________________

8. Family size_____________________________________

9. Source of income 1. Farming 2. Others (Specify)_________________________

10. Source of sheep 1. Own produce 2. Purchase

11. Proportion of your income spent on sheep___________________

12. With which types of value chains actors you linked? Multiple responses are possible 1.

Producers 2. Small traders3. Large traders 4. Hotel and restaurants 5. Consumers 6. Others

49
 End of the interview

Thank you very much for responding to our questions!!!

50