Maize in Benin: Production,
Markets and Transport
E. van den Akker
Department of Agricultural Economics in the Tropics and Subtropics (490B), University of Hohenheim, 70593 Stuttgart, Germany, Tel.: 0049/711/4593392, Fax: 0049/711/4593762, email: vdakker@uni-hohenheim.de
Keywords: Benin, maize production, maize
consumption, marketing, prices, costs, transport
1 Aims of the research
Maize is one of the major crops of Benin. Its large number of varieties allows production under climatic conditions reaching from subhumid to semi-arid. While maize is grown in all parts of the country its share in the rotation differs from region to region depending on the local consumption patterns and comparative advantages of other products. Generally, maize is the main staple food crop in the South, but it is considered a cash crop in the North of Benin.
Given the geography of Benin, rainfall patterns differ and so do the harvest calendars which determine spatial and temporal supply. Whereas bi-modal rainfall in the South and in the lower part of the Center enables farmers to have two growing seasons, the upper part of the Center and the North of Benin are characterized by uni-modal rainfall and one growing season.
In this presentation the periodically changing regional availability of maize, reaching sometimes from a strong surplus to a high deficit, will be visualized with the help of four maps, these are based on research results and secondary data. The maps and the explaining text are an attempt to facilitate the understanding of the spatial and temporal distribution of maize production and consumption quantities resulting in periodically changing regional prices and trade directions in Benin. In addition, some examples of prices, marketing and transportation costs as well as profit margins between selected markets and trade flows are provided.
A presentation of this kind should be helpful
to policy makers and students to grasp the intricacies of spatial and temporal
production and trade patterns in a country such as Benin.
Available statistical data on the production of agricultural products, on losses due to transformation, transport and storage as well as on consumption patterns of food crops were analyzed (CARDER; ONASA, 1997). To ensure the validity of the data they were cross-checked by comparing different sources and by discussing their reliability with experts.
Maize was chosen in view of its importance as food and cash crop. The lowest aggregation level of the available statistic data on agriculture are the “sousprefectures”. Benin comprises 77 “sousprefectures” including six urban districts. At this level, the cultivated area of all crops and seasons, their yields and the resulting production are published annually by the Ministry of Rural Development (MDR) and the official extension service CARDER (Centre d’Action Régionale pour le Développement Rural).
Database of the maps
The production and consumption year was
divided into four quarters (January to March, April to June, July to September,
October to December). Taking the averages of three years to eliminate erratic
fluctuations quarterly figures on production (1994/95 to 1996/97), on consumption
and on prices (1995 to 1997) were established. Following the regional changing
harvest calendar (Table 1) the percentage of maize production per period
and “sousprefecture” was defined. The net maize quantity available for
consumption was obtained by multiplying the gross production with a coefficient
representing quantity losses (transformation and storage) and the need
of seed for the next growing season.
The annual demand per “sousprefecture” was obtained by multiplication of the actual population (MPRE, 1994) and the per capita demand (ONASA, 1997) (Table 2). The demand per period was assumed to be a quarter of the total demand thus ignoring seasonal demand variations.
Net production quantity minus demand delivered the product balance per “sousprefecture” and period. The obtained values form the actual database of the maps. Ranges indicating the maize balance level reach from strong deficit (dark red) over balanced situation (yellow) to strong surplus (dark blue).
The price examples of selected markets (Table 3) are based on monthly prices published by the price and market information system LISA of ONASA. In each department one producer, one consumer and, if available, one border market were chosen. Following the calculation of average quantities price averages from 1995 to 1997 were calculated.
Marketing and transportation costs (Table 4) were taken from a market study of project F4, SFB 308, carried out in 1996. On 16 different markets 160 traders and 160 carriers had been asked about their major trading and transportation connections, the transported volume, trade directions and their seasonal dependence and the level of marketing and transportation costs. Averages of these cost data, refering to the transportation of maize with a truck, were used in the price examples of the maps.
About prices and costs, the following assumption was made: consumer price minus the sum of producer price plus marketing and transportation costs indicates the profit margin. A positive profit margin implies a trade flow from the producer to the consumer market, a negative profit margin implies no trade flow. Marketing and transportation costs are kept constant for all periods although some seasonal cost variations may occur due to changing road conditions during the rainy season, even though the chosen examples are based on the costs of wholesalers and carriers using main roads.
The indicated trade flows per period were
compared with the results of the market study and cross-checked with the
level of product quantities per region.
Results
The maps about the distribution of surplus and deficit regions in Benin demonstrate how the regional availability of maize changes over time during a year.
During the first quarter of the year (January to March) a large surplus of maize is building up in Northern and Central Benin following the harvest in December / January and a low consumption locally of maize. Especially in the North, maize is produced as a cash crop in addition to cotton. In the South, most of the “sousprefectures” show first signs of a deficit during this period. The regional quantity level and the profit margin reflect both the direction of the trade flows from the North to the South.
In the second quarter (April to June) only two “sousprefectures” in the entire country show a light surplus due to the production of early maturing maize. During this period, the main growing season starts in the South. In line with the dwindling stocks of maize prices increase, the highest prices can be found in May / June. The trade flows still go from the North to the South, even though the profit margins become smaller. Looking at the map, the quantity balances of the North don’t reflect this situation at the first sight due to the static character of the map. The stored quantity of the product from one period to the next is not shown and neither are seasonal changes in the consumption pattern based on the substitution of maize by other products and vice-versa taken into account.
The third quarter (July to September) is characterized by a surplus of maize in most of the “sousprefectures” of the South and the Center due to the harvest of the first growing season starting in July. In the North, the first quantities are harvested in August / September. The different price levels reflect this situation; while in the South prices reach their lowest level during this period, they are still high in the North. During this period, maize is traded from the South to the North. Maize from the South, especially from the area of Ketou, is preferred for consumption but cannot be stored for a long period due to its organoleptic and processing characteristics (mealy and easy to grind because of a soft skin).
During the fourth quarter (October to December), the second harvest comes up in the South while in the Center maize is still growing on the field. In the North, the harvest goes on until January. During this period, most of the prices reach their lowest level due to a relative market saturation in the South (stored quantities of the previous period and harvested quantities). The trade flows are mainly directed from the South to the South and the Center and from the North to the North.
Most of the “sousprefectures” of the coastal region show an absolute deficit during the whole year. This region is characterized by a high population density, high land use ratio with very limited access to arable land not yet under cultivation and low yields. It depends on the import of maize as the production of other products (manioc, beans, peanuts etc.) is also limited.
Looking at the price composition, even
during the period with the highest prices, the profit margins are relatively
small. The marketing channel comprises several levels but the profit per
level stays small. Costs of transportation and marketing (package, handling,
taxes etc.) between producer and consumer markets are often higher than
the profit margin.
Interpretation
While interpreting the maps, several limitations have to be kept in mind.
Level of aggregation: The maps show a certain aggregation level – aggregation over time and over space. In reality, prices and quantities are subject to daily changing conditions (harvested quantities, weather, availability of other products etc.), thus they also change continuously. In a map, only aggregated and static averages can be shown.
Per capita consumption: As mentioned above, one assumption made is the daily constant consumption quantity of maize. For each region different annual consumption quantities are taken, but during the year, no seasonal differences are made due to the lack of sound data.
Substitution by other products: In reality, maize is partially substituted by other food crops like sorghum or manioc (gari) depending on preferences, prices and availability of all products and cross-price elasticities. In the maps, these seasonal product exchanges influencing the per capita demand are not considered due to the lack of information.
Volume of trade flows: The time dependent directions of trade flows are known, not known are the quantities traded from one region to another. So far, only a price information system exists, the daily traded quantities are not systematically asked. As the seasonal changing per capita consumption is not known and as each importing region has several supplying regions at its disposal, the traded and stored quantity cannot be calculated.
Storage: As already mentioned, in each time period a certain quantity of maize will be stored and sold during one of the following periods. The quantity stored at farmers or traders level is mainly influenced by the expected need of home consumption, the actual and the expected need of cash, the actual and the expected market price and a possible profit through storage.
Import and Export: The database of the maps consists only of data from Benin without considering import and export possibilities. First, the known data are not reliable, second, the yearly import and export quantities are subject to the actual market situation in Benin.
To overcome these limitations, interregional
trade models are helpful for calculating spatial and temporal flows.
The maps offer a fast and easy overview about the regional availability of maize in Benin during an average year divided into four periods. In addition, price and costs examples of selected markets and resulting trade flow directions are presented.
Due to the static character of maps, the necessary aggregation levels and the lack of data and information, several facts like the regionally traded volumes per period, the stored quantities or the seasonal changing consumption patterns cannot be shown and taken into consideration. With the help of an interregional trade model, some of these facts can be assessed. The objective function of an interregional trade model implies optimization of the net welfare (sum of producer and consumer welfare minus costs) under given constraints. In such a model, supply and demand functions of several food crops, regions and periods can simultaneously be optimized resulting in market equilibrium prices and quantities including the volume of trade flows from region to region, the stored quantities from one period to the following and the substitution between products. An interregional trade model is available at ONASA (van den Akker and Hauser, 1999).
To provide a comprehensive overview about
the maize market in Benin and its functioning, the combination of both,
maps and model, will be required. Further work in this direction is being
persued by ONASA.
AGRER (1986): Étude de la Commercialisation des Produits Vivriers au Bénin, Volume 1, Bruxelles.Akker, van den E. and E. Hauser (1999): An Interregional and Intertemporal Trade Model as an Instrument for Agricultural Market Policy in Benin. Paper presented at the regional workshop: Paysans et Chercheurs dans un Environnement en Mutation: La Recherche Agronomique en Afrique de l’Ouest. Cotonou, 22.-26. February 1999.
Akker, van den E. (1997): Promotion de la production végétale au Bénin: Adoption et effets des innovations, évolution prévisionnelle des superficies et rendements de cultures et mesures urgentes à prendre. Résultats de l’enquête DELPHI auprès des experts du secteur rural 1995/1996. Working Paper, University of Hohenheim, Stuttgart.
MDR and CARDER (yearly): Plan de Campagne. Cotonou, Benin.
Ministère du Plan et de la Restructuration (MPRE) and INSAE (1994): Deuxieme Recensement Général de la Population et de l’Habitation (RGPH2). Projections Demographiques 1992 – 2027. Cotonou, Benin.
ONASA (1997): Rapport d’Evaluation de la Campagne Agricole 1996/97 et les Perspectives Alimentaires pour 1997 au Bénin. Cotonou, Benin.
ONASA (several years): LISA – Lettre d’Information sur la Sécurité Alimentaire dans le Cadre du Système d’Alerte Rapide. Cotonou, Benin.
Beck, K. V. (1995): Die Vermarktung von Grundnahrungsmitteln in Benin. Eine Bestandsaufnahme des interregionalen Handels vor und nach der politischen Liberalisierung. PHD-Thesis, University of Hohenheim, Stuttgart.7 Related WebsitesBrüntrup, M. (1997): Agricultural Price Policy and its Impact on Production, Income, Employment and the Adoption of Innovations. A Farming Systems Based Analysis of Cotton Policy in Northern Benin. Lang, Frankfurt.
Christiansen, B. (1993): Effizienz des Vermarktungssystems von Mais, dargestellt am Beispiel der Provinz Atlantique, Benin. Vauk, Kiel.
Lutz, C. (1994): The functioning of the maize market in Benin: spatial and temporal arbitrage on the market of a staple food crop. AGRO, University of Amsterdam.
Overview about the situation of agricultural production provided by FAO:
http://www.fao.org/giews/french/basedocs/ben/bentoc1f.htm
Map1 : Surplus
and Deficit Regions. Examples of Trade flows, Prices, Price composition
of Maize1st quarter
(January -
March: Average 1995 - 1997)
Map2 : Surplus
and Deficit Regions. Examples of Trade flows, Prices, Price composition
of Maize 2nd quarter
(April - June:
Average 1995 - 1997)
Map3 : Surplus
and Deficit Regions Examples of Trade flows, Prices, Price composition
of Maize 3rd quarter
(July - September:
Average 1995 - 1997)
Map4 : Surplus
and Deficit Regions Examples of Trade flows, Prices, Price composition
of Maize 4th quarter
(October -
December: Average 1995 - 1997)
Table 1: Maize harvest calendar
| Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | Mai | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec | |
| Region | ||||||||||||
|
|
## | ## | #### | #### | ## | #### | ||||||
|
|
#### | #### | #### | #### | #### | |||||||
|
|
#### | ## | #### | #### | #### | #### | ||||||
| Region 1 = Mono, Atlantique, Ouémé; Region 2 = Zou; Region 3 = Atacora, Borgou. | ||||||||||||
Source: AGRER 1986 page 13; van den Akker
1997
Table 2: Consumption pattern of major food
crops (kg per caput and year)
| Region |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Mono |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Atlantique |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Oueme |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Zou |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Atacora |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Borgou |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Source: ONASA 1997
Table 3: Average maize prices (1995 to
1997) per period of selected markets (FCFA/kg)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Oct – Dec) |
| Mono | Dogbo-Tota |
|
|
|
|
|
| Mono | Aplahoue |
|
|
|
|
|
| Mono | Come |
|
|
|
|
|
| Atlantique | Sehoue |
|
|
|
|
|
| Atlantique | Cotonou |
|
|
|
|
|
| Ouémé | Ketou |
|
|
|
|
|
| Ouémé | Pobe |
|
|
|
|
|
| Ouémé | Porto-Novo |
|
|
|
|
|
| Zou | Glazoue |
|
|
|
|
|
| Zou | Bohicon |
|
|
|
|
|
| Atacora | Djougou |
|
|
|
|
|
| Atacora | Tanguieta |
|
|
|
|
|
| Atacora | Natitingou |
|
|
|
|
|
| Borgou | Nikki |
|
|
|
|
|
| Borgou | Malanville |
|
|
|
|
|
| Borgou | Parakou |
|
|
|
|
|
Source: ONASA LISA 1995 – 1997, own calculation
- 1: producer market; 2: border market; 3: consumer market
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21,6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14,2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16,3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16,3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16,2 |
Source: own market study 1996
1) The marketing and transportation costs
depend mainly on the marketing level, the type of market and market tax,
the traded volume, the street quality, the number of checkpoints and the
distance between the markets.
Includes the following data (if available) compressed into one "zip" file:
- GIS: layers (ArcView, *.shp), projects (ArcView project files, *.apr) and legends (ArcView legends *.avl)
- source data: tab delimited text (*.txt), excel5 (*.xls), rich text format (*.rtf)
metadata: text file (*.txt)