Findings from
Diagnostic Country Report (DCR)
Ghana
Maize Sector
Outline
• National Seed Policy: Implication on Production/Farmers
• National Food Buffer Stock Company(NAFCO)
• Fertilizer sector reforms and implications for Farmers
2
Impact of National Seed Policy
Access to Maize Seeds:
47.9% reported they have many options, 30.7 percent had
few options and 21.4% indicated they have no option.
(Nearly 80% of the responding farmers indicated having
multiple options for obtaining maize seeds)
3
Impact of National Seed Policy
• Access to maize seed
– About 37.1% ranked the availability of maize seed
as very good, 47.9% ranked it good, 11.4% and
3.6% ranked availability as neutral and bad
respectively
• Affordability of maize seed
– 64.3% considered available maize seed as
affordable while 35.7% considered it expensive.
4
Impact of National Seed Policy
Impact on Seed Quality
• Indicators of seed quality: (i) germination rate and (ii)
yield
• About 38.6% of the farmers ranked the quality of maize
seed as very good, 45.7% rated it as good, 13.6% and
12.1% rated the quality as neutral and bad respectively.
(Over 84% of the respondent farmers were happy with
the quality of seeds obtained)
5
National Food Buffer Stock Company (NAFCO)
NAFCO: state-owned-enterprise set up in 2010 to buy, preserve,
store, sell, and distribute excess grains in warehouses across the
country.
Its part of the strategy to reduce post-harvest losses, ensure price
and supply stability and establish emergency grain reserves.
Given the difficulty of NAFCO to reach farmers in remote areas, 73
Licensed Buying Companies (LBCs) are contracted by NAFCO to
purchase maize and rice from farmers in the various villages at a
minimum purchasing price (i.e. floor price)
6
PROCUREMENT
• Sales information, Sales pattern and payment terms
• Average selling price of maize in 2014 is about GH₵ 100/120 Kg
however prices of maize range between GH₵ 55/120 Kg to about
GH₵ 130/120 Kg.
Response of farmers
Option of selling
Yes (63.6%) No (36.4%)
Rank option of buyer available
Many option (42.4%) few option (42.4), very few
option(12.4%) no option(3%)
Source of selling
Market queens(62.9%) local traders (21.4%),any available
buyer(11.4%), agro-firms(2.1%) others source(2.2%)
Place of selling
Major market (65%), homes or farm gate(35%)
Distance from home
21.4km
Network
entities
of
procurement Very good ( 25.7%), good(52.9%) neutral(13.6%), bad(7.8%)
very bad(0.7%)
Price determination
Market price (90%), negotiation (10%)
Observe Change in price
Positive change(57.3%),
change(18.6%)
negative
change(21.5%)7
no
Impact of Fertilizer Sector Reforms
• Sources: 24.3% of respondent obtained fertilizer from public
source (MoFA), 75% respondents buy their fertilizer from
private source, while 0.7% purchased from both
Year
•Increased importation of
fertilizer made fertilizer better
available to users
Total
2003
92,807
2006
189,879
2009
335,186
2012
3,362,532
• The increased fertilizer usage can be attributed to a
combination of subsidy (PFA, 2010) and private sector
participation in the dealership.
8
Impact of Fertilizer Sector Reforms
Availability of Fertilizer:
• Fertilizer was available during the planting season.
(Over 72% of respondent farmers got fertilizers on time,
while 28% did not)
• Challenges: prospects of subsidized fertilizer did not
provide incentive to buy fertilizer from the open market
and when the subsidized fertilizer was available, farmers
did not receive relevant information on time.
• About 14.3% of the respondents had shifted from
public sources to private sources.
9
Impact of Fertilizer Sector Reforms
Affordability of Fertilizer:
• About 77.9% ranked fertilizers as very expensive, 21.4%
ranked them as expensive while only 0.7% were neutral about
price of fertilizer available to them.
• In last five years, 72.9% respondents indicated fertilizers have
become expensive while 9.2% responded affordability has
increased, 17.9% indicated there was no change.
10
CONCLUDING OBSERVATIONS
• Reforms has brought about increased private
sector participation in the input (seed) sector.
• The product market reforms has not impacted
competition within the staple(maize) sector.
• The extent to which inputs sector competition
has led to consumer and producer welfare need
time to be examined further.
11
THANK YOU
FOR YOUR
ATTENTION
12