Determinants of market outlet choice decision of tomato producers in Fogera woreda, South Gonder zone, Ethiopia

Figures & data

Figure 1. Location map of Fogera Woreda.

Table 1. Number of sampled households in each kebele

	Household number			Sample size
	M	F	Total	M	F	Total
Wereta zuriya	685	30	715	107	5	112
Shina	506	15	521	78	3	81
Tiwa	260	10	270	40	2	42

n = 235

Source: own computation, 2018

Table 2. Summary of Hypothesized Independent Variables for MVP Model

Variable	Description	Measurement	Expected effect
			Wholesalers	Collectors	Retailers	Consumers
agehh	Age of the household head	Number of years	Negative	Positive	Positive	Positive
Sexhh	Sex of the household head	1 = male,0 = female	Positive	Positive	Positive	Positive
Educstatus	Educational status of the household head	0 = illiterate,1 = literate	Positive	Positive	Positive	Positive
hhsize	Number of persons per household	Adult equivalent	Positive	Positive	Positive	Neg/pos
LsizeT	Area cultivated for tomato	Hectare	Positive	Positive		Positive
Livstkowshp	Livestock ownership	Tropical unit equivalent (TLU)	Positive negative	Positive negative	Positive negative	Positive negative
Dnmkt	Distance from residence to market center	Hours walking	Negative	Positive	Positive	Negative
Acrdt	Access to credit services	1 = Yes, 0 otherwise	Positive	Positive	Positive	Positive
TOfexp	Tomato farming experience	Years	Negative	Positive/negative	Positive/negative	Positive
Owntrans	Own transportation	1 = Yes, 0 otherwise	Positive	Positive	Positive	Positive
Memanycoop	Membership in cooperatives	1 = member, 0 = otherwise	Positive	Positive/negative	Positive/negative	Positive

Table 3. Proportion of Producers Choosing Market Outlets

Outlet choice	Wholesalers		Collectors		Retailers		Consumers
	Frequency	Percent	Frequency	Percent	Frequency	Percent	Frequency	Percent
No	61	25.96	70	29.79	85	36.17	85	36.17
Yes	174	74.04	165	70.21	150	63.83	150	63.83

Source: own computation, 2018

Table 4. Total volume of sale for each channel

Variables	Sold tomatoes in quintal	Percent
Quantity sold for wholesalers	2207.05	30.87
Quantity sold for collectors	1637.1	22.9
Quantity sold for retailers	1768.75	24.74
Quantity sold for consumers	1535.45	21.49
Total output sold	7148.35	100

Source: Own computation of survey data (2018).

Table 5. Producers mean and proportion by socio-economic characteristics across tomato marketing outlets

Variables		Wholesalers	Collectors	Retailers	Consumers
		Mean	Mean	Mean	Mean
Age of the household head		39.00(11.1)	40.77(11.23)	40.09(10.82)	39.7 (11.95)
Household size		2.63(0.66)	2.71(0.69)	2.65(.67)	2.58(0.62)
Distance to nearest market		1.32(0.57)	1.38(0.52)	1.35(0.53)	1.38(0.56)
Land size for tomato		0.34(0.199)	0.34(.18)	.3393(0.18)	0.35(.19)
Livestock ownership		5.66(3.20)	5.68(3.24)	5.76(3.10)	5.65(3.22)
Tomato farming experience		7.86(5.04)	8.57(5.33)	8.12(5.10)	7.71(5.30)
Dummy variables		(%)	(%)	(%)	(%)
Sex	Male	95.98	96.36	96.00	96.00
	Female	4.02	3.64	4.00	4.00
Educational status	Literate	37.93	35.15	40.00	36.67
	Illiterate	62.07	64.85	60	63.33
Access to credit	Yes	73.56	73.94	81.33	74.00
	No	26.44	26.06	18.67	26.00
Own transportation	Yes	75.86	64.85	68.00	72.67
	No	24.14	35.15	32.00	27.33
Membership in any cooperatives	Yes	6.90	6.06	5.33	5.33
	No	93.10	93.94	94.67	94.67

Figure 2. Supply Chain Mapping of Tomato in the study Area (Fogera woreda).

Source: Own sketching based on survey result

Figure 3. Tomato Marketing Channels.

Sources: own computation (2018)

Table 6. Correlation Matrix of farmers’ Market Channels choice for Multivariate Probit Model

	⍴ 1	⍴ 2	⍴ 3	⍴ 4
⍴ 1	1.0000
⍴ 2	0.1662***	1.0000
⍴ 3	− 0.0795	0.5167***	1.0000
⍴ 4	0.2815**	0.1487**	0.3365**	1.0000

Source: Own computation of survey data (2018).

Table 7. Multivariate probit estimation results of the determinants of tomato market outlet choice

VARIABLES	s	Collectors	Retailers	Consumers
Agehh	−0.0312**	0.0039	0.0034	0.0056
	(0.0122)	(0.0103)	(0.0099)	(0.0103)
Sexhh	−0.0806	0.0451	0.1175	0.0992
	(0.6134)	(0.6124)	(0.4426)	(0.5602)
Hsizeequ	0.0201	0.2666*	0.0290	−0.2827*
	(0.1729)	(0.1487)	(0.1588)	(0.1537)
Educstatus	1.0109***	0.4396	0.8189***	0.2934
	(0.3728)	(0.2406)	(0.2468)	(0.2301)
TOfexp	−0.0192	0.0316	−0.0080	−0.0328
	(0.0231)	(0.0221)	(0.0222)	(0.0205)
Disnmkt	−0.0153	0.5288***	0.1341	0.3362*
	(0.1995)	(0.1875)	(0.1798)	(0.1844)
LsizeT	1.0810*	0.3166	0.5282	1.0644*
	(0.6028)	(0.5663)	(0.5257)	(0.5620)
Lisvstowneship	−0.0179	0.0004	0.0309	−0.0022
	(0.0382)	(0.0341)	(0.0352)	(0.0335)
Owntrans	1.4184***	−0.0205	0.0050	0.5510***
	(0.2371)	(0.0937)	(0.1327)	(0.1934)
Acrdt	1.1278***	1.1056***	1.4150***	0.8473***
	(0.2225)	(0.1972)	(0.2083)	(0.1985)
Memanycoop	0.0246	−0.5535	−0.5779	−0.2761
	(0.3549)	(0.3855)	(0.4076)	(0.3494)
Constant	0.3735	−2.0299**	−1.3207**	−0.5409
	(0.8558)	(0.7938)	(0.6180)	(0.7246)
Observations	235	235	235	235

Likelihood ratio test of rho21 = rho31 = rho41 = rho32 = rho42 = rho43 = 0: chi2(6) = 37.44, Wald chi2(44) = 370.49, Prob > chi2 = 0.0000, Robust standard errors in parentheses,

*** p < 0.01, ** p < 0.05, * p < 0.1

Source: Own computation of survey data (2018).

Appendix 1. Conversion factors used to compute adult equivalent

Labor class	Age (years)	Conversion factor
Children	<7	0
Children	7–14	0.4
Adult male	15–64	1.0
Adult female	15–65	0.8
Old male	Greater than 65	0.5
Old female	Greater than/equal 65	0.5

Source: Storck et al., 1991

Appendix 2. Conversion factors used to compute tropical livestock units (TLU)

Livestock Category	Conversion factor
Calf	0.25
Oxen/Cow	1.00
Bull	0.75
Heifer	0.75
Horse/mules	1.10
Donkey adult	0.70
Donkey young	0.35
Goats/sheep adult	0.13
Goat/Sheep young	0.06
Poultry birds	0.013
Weaned calf	0.34

Source: Storck et al., 1991

Appendix 3. Error covariance matrix and correlations of the MVP model

Correlations	Correlations Coefficients	Standard errors	z	Pr>z
atrho21	.0459199	.1164657	0.39	0.693
Atrho31	−.3758042	.1214955	−3.09	0.002***
Atrho41	.0701572	.1281478	0.55	0.584
Atrho32	.6346371	.1499817	4.23	0.000 ***
Atrho42	.1148467	.1361126	0.84	0.399
Atrho43	.1689691	.1106872	1.53	0.127
rho21	.0458876	.1162205	0.39	0.693
Rho31	−.3590581	.105832	−3.39	0.001***
Rho41	.0700423	.1275191	0.55	0.583
rho32	.561237	.1027394	5.46	0.000***
Rho42	.1143444	.1343329	0.85	0.395
Rho43	.1673792	.1075862	1.56	0.20

Likelihood ration test of rho21 = rho31 = rho41 = rho32 = rho42 = rho43 = 0 where 1, 2, 3 and 4 stands for wholesaler, collector, retailer and consumer, respectively, chi2(6) = 37.44, Wald chi2(44) = 370.49, Prob > chi2 = 0.0000, ***, ** and * are statistically significant at 1%, 5% and 10% level, respectively.