22 Research on World Agricultural Economy | Volume 03 | Issue 03 | September 2022 Research on World Agricultural Economy https://ojs.nassg.org/index.php/rwae Copyright © 2022 by the author(s). Published by NanYang Academy of Sciences Pte. Ltd. This is an open access article under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) License. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/). *Corresponding Author: Asmera Adicha, Southern Agricultural Research Institute, Jinka Agricultural Research Center, SNNPR, Jinka, Ethiopia; Email: asmera05@gmail.com DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.36956/rwae.v3i3.568 Received: 27 June 2022; Received in revised form: 27 July 2022; Accepted: 8 August 2022; Published: 1 September 2022 Citation: Adicha, A., Alemayehu, Y., Ermias, G., Darcho, D., 2022. Value Chain Analysis of Korarima (Aframomum Corrorima) in South Omo Zone, SNNPR Ethiopia. Research on World Agricultural Economy. 3(3), 568. http://dx.doi. org/10.36956/rwae.v3i3.568 RESEARCH ARTICLE Value Chain Analysis of Korarima (Aframomum Corrorima) in South Omo Zone, SNNPR Ethiopia Asmera Adicha1* Yidnekachew Alemayehu2 Gedion Ermias1 Dawit Darcho1 1. Southern Agricultural Research Institute, Jinka Agricultural Research Center, SNNPR, Jinka, Ethiopia 2. Southern Agricultural Research Institute, Areka Agricultural Research Center, SNNPR, Areka, Ethiopia Abstract: Korarima is a known cash crop in the South Omo zone and provides a wide range of economic and socio- cultural benefits. Even though its economic and socio-cultural importance the development of the Korarima sector along with the value chain is hampered by several constraints. Hence, the study aimed to analyze the Korarima value chain in the South Omo zone. Using a two-stage sampling technique, 120 Kororima producers were selected to collect primary data through structured questionnaires. Descriptive statistics and econometrics model (multivariate probit model) were used for data analysis. The study identified three major Korarima market outlet choices such as collectors, retailers, and wholesalers as alternatives to Korarima producers to sell the majority of their products. Thus, collectors accounted for 82.2%, wholesalers (73.6%), and retailers (35.5%) of the total sold. The results of a multivariate probit model indicated that sex of household, credit access, family size, price information, market distance, and extension contact of farmers significantly affected the market outlet choice decisions in one or another way. Furthermore, no brand indicating this crop, inadequate infrastructural development, and market accessibility, weak extension services regarding improved varieties were major problems identified. Therefore, it is better to work on the brand name of this particular crop to trace up to the end market, infrastructural development and market accessibility, extension services provided regarding the improved Korarima variety, and accessing formal market information from the concerned body are essential to enhance Korarima producers’ benefit and bargaining power through avoiding information asymmetry. Keywords: Value chain; Market outlet; Multivariate; Korarima; South Ari mailto:asmera05@gmail.com http://dx.doi.org/10.36956/rwae.v3i3.568 http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4557-5468 http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3365-8063 23 Research on World Agricultural Economy | Volume 03 | Issue 03 | September 2022 1. Introduction Agriculture remains the main activity in the Ethiopian economy. Agricultural growth is not only required to feed the country but is also the driving force to generate for- eign exchange. About 80% of Ethiopia’s foreign exchange is derived from agricultural exports [1]. Enhancing agricul- tural production and export trade is the current strategy followed by the country to curtail the critical capital short- age and enhance economic growth. Spices have a major stake in the production system and the foreign earnings of the country. It has a great role in transforming farmers into producers for the market in- stead of producing merely for subsistence [2]. Ethiopia has become one of the largest consumers of spices in Africa. People use spices to flavour bread, butter, meat, soups, and vegetables. They also use spices to make medicines and perfumes [3]. Ethiopia is a homeland for many spices, such as Ethiopian Korarima (Korarima/Aframomum Cor- rorima), long red pepper, black cumin, white cumin/bish- ops weed, coriander, fenugreek, turmeric, sage, cinnamon, and ginger [3]. Out of the 109 spices listed by International Organization for Standardization (ISO), 50 spices are cultivated or grown in Ethiopia. Apart from this, there are several other spices and herbs available in small quantities [4]. The average land covered by spices is approximately 222,700 ha and the production is 244,000 tons per annum. However, the supply has dwindled considerably in recent years and the Ethiopian Korarima export was less than 100 MT in 2012. The production of Ethiopian Korarima during the 2014/2015 crop season was 9.56 thousand tons with a productivity of 5.1 Q/ha. In Ethiopia, Southern National and Nationalities Peo- ples Regional States (SNNP) is one of the regions which produce the maximum quantity of spices in the country. The major Ethiopian Korarima production areas are the forest ecology of South and South West mid-altitude and highland Korarima areas such as the Kaffa zone (center of origin of Korarima), Bench-Maji zone, Sheka zone, Ma- jang zone, Dawuro zone, Wolayita zone, and Gamo Gofa zone, Kembata-Tembaro zone in SNNPR and Jimma zone (Oromiya). The price of a kilo of dry Korarima capsule in the domestic market ranges from 80 Birr to 100 Birr (One US$ = 21 Birr) in the villages. Ethiopia exports about 200 MT of Ethiopian Korarima per year [4]. In South Omo Zone Korarima is also abundantly found and potentially grown/produced by smallholder farmers of South Ari, Semen Ari, and Salamago districts. In the Zone, for the past five consecutive years about 16,843.96 ha, Korarima has grown with a production of around 70,744.63 Quintal with average productivity of 4.2 quin- tal/ha [5]. Korarima has a contribution to income genera- tion and also has value in reducing/minimizing poverty for smallholder farmers. Despite, its availability, huge potential, and the role it plays, limited attention has been given to its production, value, value addition activities, and marketing outlets choice. As result, the unregulated price of Korarima (black market), South Omo zone Korarima is transported to Gofa by the black market, and recognition and benefit from it are given to the former Gamo Gofa zone. And also small farm gate prices and less market access are disadvanta- geous for producers. Therefore, this study focused on identifying major value chain and marketing actors, value additive activities in production, outlet choice in the mar- keting of Korarima and its products, and identifying the major value chain and marketing opportunities and con- straints. 2. Research Methodology 2.1 Type and Sources of Data Qualitative and quantitative data were collected from primary and secondary data sources. The primary data on the value chain and marketing of Korarima, value chain, and marketing channels, direct and indirect benefits of Korarima, supply and market price of Korarima, transac- tion cost in marketing Korarima, main actors and their role, margin share and distribution among market actors, marketing infrastructure and information, market partici- pants and concentration at each market chain, opportuni- ties and threats of Korarima production and marketing, farmers perception will be collected from key value chain actors and stakeholders. Value chain actors and marketing stakeholder includes sample producers, collectors, traders, exporters, consumers, enterprise operators engaged in the value chain and marketing of Korarima, end-users of the products, formal and informal institutions involved in Ko- rarima value chain and marketing, supporters of Korarima value chain and marketing, as well as representatives from government organizations and others working in Korarima production. Secondary data were collected from literature, reports, and documents both published and unpublished data sources. 2.2 Methods of Data Collection To collect the primary data both participatory rural ap- praisal (PRA) tools of informal methods and formal sur- vey methods of data collection were employed. Informal survey methods such as focus group discussions (FGDs), in-depth interviews with key informants (KII), and di- rect observation with transacting walk will be employed, 24 Research on World Agricultural Economy | Volume 03 | Issue 03 | September 2022 whereas for the formal survey method, structured survey questionnaires were administered to sample respondents. Informal survey such as focus group discussion with known social strata groups (e.g. women, youths, elders, others) was conducted before the formal survey. A ques- tionnaire was pre-tested to indorse new information and to modify the structured questionnaire. Open discussion with producers, traders, consumers, and exporters & were interviewed according to their activities or function (as Value Chain Analysis starts from production up to final consumption). 2.3 Sampling Technique Two-stage sampling technique was employed to draw the sample from a given population of Korarima produc- ers and traders. In the first stage, potential Korarima pro- ducing and marketing Kebeles were identified purposive- ly. In the second stage, sample households were identified by random selection. Yemane [6] sample size determination formula was used to determine the number of respondents. 2(1 ) N n N e = + ∗ (1) where, n=the sample size, N=total number of Korarima producers, e=acceptable sampling error, and the value of ‘e’ is 95% confidence level and it’s assumed to be e=0.05. After determination of sample size, the sample respondent from smallholder household was selected randomly from sample Kebeles. 2.4 Data Analysis Both simple statistics and econometric models were chosen for the analysis. The econometric analysis was employed to analyze factors affecting the level of market outlet choice and value addition. Software called Statisti- cal Package for Social Science (SPSS) and STATA were used for the analysis. 2.4.1 Econometric Model Specification This study used a multivariate probit model as it cap- tures the household variation in the choice of market outlets and estimates several correlated binary outcomes jointly. A multivariate probit model would be appropri- ate for jointly predicting these three choices (collector, retailer, and wholesaler) on an individual-specific basis. A multivariate probit model simultaneously set out the influence of a set of explanatory variables on the choice of market outlets, while allowing for the potential correla- tions between unobserved disturbances as well as the rela- tionship between the choices of different market outlets [7]. In this case, three-outlet choices are collector, retailer, and wholesaler and the model enables Korarima produc- ers to choose more than one outlets that are not mutually exclusive to get a better price. The selection of appropri- ate market outlet i by farmer j is CijY defined as the choice of farmer j to transact market channel i ( CijY =1) or not ( CijY =0) is expressed as follows; Yij C = 1 if Yij C = Xij C αij + εc ≥ 0 ⇔ Xij C ≥− εc 0 if Yij C = Xij C αij + εc < 0 ⇔ Xij C <− εc' (2) where v Cijα aector of estimators, Yij C = 1 if Yij C = Xij C αij + εc ≥ 0 ⇔ Xij C ≥− εc 0 if Yij C = Xij C αij + εc < 0 ⇔ Xij C <− εc' is a vector of error terms under the assumption of normal distribution, CijY de- pendent variable for market outlet choices simultaneously and CijX combined effect of the explanatory variables. The selection of one type of market outlet choice would be dependent on the selection of the other, since smallholder farmers’ choice decisions are interdependent, suggesting the need to estimate them simultaneously. To solve this problem many scholars suggested and used a multivariate probit simulation model [8,9]. Since smallhold- er farmers’ market outlet choice decisions were expected to be affected by the same set of explanatory variables. Collectorj = x'1β1 + εA Retailerj = x'2β2 + εB Wℎolesalerj = x'3β3 + εC (3) where collector j, wholesaler j, and retailer j are binary variables taking values 1 when farmer j selects collector, wholesaler, and retailer respectively, and 0 otherwise; X1 to X4 is a vector of variables; β1 to β3 a vector of param- eters to be estimated and ε disturbance term. In a multivariate model, the use of several market out- lets simultaneously is possible and the error terms jointly follow a multivariate normal distribution (MVN) with zero conditional mean and variance normalized to unity, and ρij represents the correlation between endogenous variables, given by    …..N 0 0 0 1 12 13 21 1 23 31 32 1 (4) E (/) = 0 Var (/) = 1 Cov (/) =  (5) 2.4.2 Description of Variables and Expected Sign The likely variables, which were supposed to affect producers’ market outlet choice decisions, are explained in Table 1. 25 Research on World Agricultural Economy | Volume 03 | Issue 03 | September 2022 3. Results and Discussion 3.1 Socio-Economic and Demographic Charac- teristics of the Respondents This sub-section explains the profile of sampled re- spondents regarding their age, sex, family size, experi- ence, level of education, access to extension services, ac- cess to market information, and distance from the nearest market (Table 2). Gender was analyzed by checking the number of male and female-headed households. Out of the total households interviewed 95.8% were male-headed households while 4.2% were female-headed households. In both theoretical and practical situations, education level plays an important role in ensuring household access to basic needs such as food, shelter, and clothing. Skills and education enhance working efficiency resulting in more income and food security. In the study area, the mean grade level achieved by respondents was about grade 6. The minimum grade was 0 for those who were illiterate and the maximum was grade (10+3). The age of sample respondents was measured in years and provided a clue on the working ages of households. The mean age of the sample household was 37 years with the minimum and maximum age of 18 and 65 years, respectively. The mean family size of the total sample households was nearly 7 persons with a minimum of 2 and a maxi- mum of 12 persons and a standard deviation of 2.67. Therefore, this might help them for a better market outlet choice of households during Korarima marketing because of labor availability. The respondents have an average of 17 years of farming experience in Korarima production and marketing with a standard deviation of 11 years. The total land size of sampled farmers varies from 0.13 to 3 hectares and the average farm size for sampled farmers is found to be 0.78 hectares with a standard deviation of 0.53. From the total land size, the land allotted to Korarima was on average 0.29 ha with a minimum of 0.03 and a maxi- mum of 1.5 ha with a standard deviation of 0.24. According to the sample respondents, the major sourc- es of income were crop, livestock, and livestock product selling, and also there is some practice of getting off-farm and non-farm sources. The total estimated average annual income that the respondents obtained from those sources was 12,192 Birr. Distance to market is an important vari- able that affects the marketing of Korarima. The mean distance to the market center for sample households was 18 minutes with a minimum of 10 and a maximum of 50 minutes of walking on their barefoot and a standard de- viation of 2.67. Farmers who are located distant from the market center might be weakly accessible to the market outlet and have less transportation cost and time spent. 3.2 Korarima (Aframomum Corrorima) Cultiva- tion Practice in the Study Area Korarima is a known cash crop in the South Omo zone and cultivation of it is mainly practiced in the agro for- estry and river banks of South and Semen Ari areas of the zone. According to Getasetegn and Tefera [10], the cultiva- Table 1. Summary of hypothesized explanatory variable that determines Korarima producers’ market outlet choices Explanatory variables Measurement Expected sign Sex 1 if a male farmer, 0 if a female farmer -/+ Age Years + Education level(formal) Years of schooling (grade) + Family size Family members in a household living for more than 6 months (number) + Land size The total area of land managed by a household (hectare) + Annual income An annual income of a household (Ethiopian Birr) + Price information 1 if a household has price information of Korarima, 0 otherwise -/+ Extension contact Contact with extension agents in a month (Frequency) + Access to credit 1 if farmer has access to credit service, 0 otherwise + Distance to a market center Distance to the nearest market center by foot walk (minute) - Quantity produced The quantity of Korarima produced in a year (kilogram) + Experience Experience of farmers producing Korarima (years) + 26 Research on World Agricultural Economy | Volume 03 | Issue 03 | September 2022 tion of the Korarima is mainly practiced in the forests of south and South western parts of Ethiopia such as Gamo Gofa, South Omo, Kaffa, Ilubabor, Sidamo and Wellega. It provides a wide range of benefits for communities such as cultural value, income generation, and soil conserva- tion. In the study area, Korarima is used as traditional medicine and it has also important in supporting local livelihood improvement and environmental conservation. It plays a great role in the household economy and liveli- hood support by selling. A discussion with key informants (zone, woreda, and kebele experts) the main opportunities in the study area concerning Korarima cultivation was suitable agro-ecology, high demand for the Korarima, and availability of traders from other areas. However, the main constraints for the Korarima production in the study area are no practice of provision of improved seedlings, disease, and poor harvesting practice. As seen in Table 3 the average land size covered by Korarima per household was 0.29 hectares with a maximum of 1.5 hectares. 3.2.1 Land Preparation As depicted in the Table 3 more than half (59%) of Korarima cultivators practiced land preparation with oxen plow. On the other hand, 31% of cultivators used pit digging without oxen plow and few farmers used both oxen plow and pit digging (10%). As the cultivation of Korarima is intermingled with agro forestry and river banks in the study area and it is difficult for oxen to plow because rhizomes and leaves of it spread over and cover the ground. Due to this condition, farmers cleared land to remove some shrubs and bushes and let Korarima sucker expand around the area freely on the cleaned land without any management practices near shade trees. 3.2.2 Planting Method and Propagation In the study area, there were no improved varieties of the Korarima sucker and all farmers cultivate the lo- cal Korarima sucker. As per focus group discussion with model farmers, elders, and development agents they re- ported that suckers from nursery fields for plantation give a higher yield than directly suckers propagated in the field. However, most farmers didn’t practice as such on nursery plantations. The absence of improved variety coupled with problems of climate change effect and associated diseases decreased the production and productivity of producers. The lack of improved varieties and weak agronomic prac- tices are major production constraints in Ethiopia [11]. In the study area producers simply propagate Korarima from both rhizomes and seeds, and most producers used land clearing by removing some shrubs and bushes and, let- ting Korarima sucker be propagated around the area freely through its rhizomes. In the study area, once the Korarima sucker is planted, it sets seeds after 3-4 years and it con- tinues to bear seeds many times. 3.2.3 Harvesting and Handling of Korarima in the Study Area In the study area, the harvesting of Korarima was done based on visual observation of matureness by a color change from green to red and the size of the capsules. In addition, easiness to detach the capsules from the mother stalk plant and complete drying up of the capsule’s upper tip (straw) were also taken into account during harvesting. Capsules that were free from insect or physical damage, unbleached, and uniform in color for the particular stage were considered during the harvesting time. More than half (52%) of Korarima producers used sun drying, 20% Table 2. The socio-economic and demographic characteristics of sample households Respondents (120) Variables Minimum Maximum Mean Std. dev Age of respondent(years) 18 65 37.49 10.97 Family size(number) 2 12 6.63 2.67 Education level(grade) 0 10+3 4.77 3.72 Experience in Korarima marketing(years) 2 50 16.77 11.47 Landholding(ha) 0.13 3 0.78 0.53 Land covered by Korarima(ha) 0.03 1.5 0.29 0.24 Annual income (Birr) 10000 60000 12192 10078 Distance to market (minute) 10 50 18.76 10.74 Frequency % Sex of respondents Male 115 95.8 Female 5 4.2 Source: own survey, 2021 27 Research on World Agricultural Economy | Volume 03 | Issue 03 | September 2022 used smoke drying 28% used both sun and smoke dry- ing (Table 3). As revealed by the sample respondents sun drying is preferred by traders because it keeps the quality Korarima. Most of the respondents revealed immature capsule harvesting at a green stage in the study area was practiced and it affected the quality of Korarima and the reason for the lack of attractive price. 3.3 Marketing of Korarima in the Study Area 3.3.1 Selling Practice of Producers and Associated Problems There are different ways of exchange or units of trans- action in the study areas (Table 4). These are counting the number of fresh Korarima seeds and weighing scale (price per kilogram) for dried Korarima. According to sample respondents, almost all respondents sold their Korarima directly to the purchaser. However, the problems that have been created by the brokers during the marketing of Ko- rarima were taken to the limited traders (38.3%), charging high brokerage fees (4.2%), cheating on weighing (1.7%), and providing wrong price/market information (55.8%). About 70.8% of sample respondents reported that they face difficulty in finding buyers when they want to sell Korarima whereas only 29.2% said there was no difficulty in finding buyers. As per the sample respondents’ report, the reason for facing difficulty in finding the buyers of Korarima in the study area was low price offered (35.3%), lack of good market & information (22.4%), and inacces- sibility of the market or long-distance transport (42.3%). However, the sample respondent revealed that they have been sold Korarima at a lower price even though they didn’t get the expected price for their Korarima. And some others took back home and wait for another market. The result of the survey indicates that an alternative market and the existence of a limited number of traders that made smallholder Korarima producers sell at low prices in the study area were absent. 3.2.2 Buying and Selling Activities of Traders As provided in Table 5, as per the trader’s interview, the major suppliers of Korarima in the study area were farmers, collectors, and brokers. During Korarima market- ing the traders informed that the transaction for the Korar- ima took place at the market center (66.7%), farmers bring their Korarima up to their business center (25%) while only 8.3% of the transaction takes place at their farm gate. According to traders, 70% of traders cover the cost of transportation service for the farmers when they provide their Korarima to the business center whereas 30% of those didn’t cover the transportation costs. In the study area, high demand and supply of Korarima were from September up to December whereas low demand and sup- ply of Korarima were from March up to August. The total quantity of Korarima purchased by the traders amounted to 640 Qt. and each trader has purchased on average 121.8 Qt. with an average buying price of 130 Birr per kg. Table 3. Land preparation and drying of Korarima Land preparation Frequency % Drying method Frequency % Oxen plow 71 59 Sun drying 62 52 Pit dig 37 31 Smoke drying 24 20 Both oxen plow & Pit dig 12 10 Both sun and smoke drying 34 28 Source: own survey, 2021 Table 4. Korarima marketing by producers Problems in Korarima selling Frequency % Problems in finding buyers Frequency % Limited of traders 46 38.3 Face difficulty in finding buyers 85 70.8 Charge high brokerage fee 5 4.2 No difficulty in finding buyers 35 29.2 Cheating weighing scale 2 1.7 Reason for facing difficulty Low price offered 30 35.3 Lack of good market 19 22.4 Lack of good price 67 55.8 Inaccessibility to market 36 42.3 Source: own survey, 2021 28 Research on World Agricultural Economy | Volume 03 | Issue 03 | September 2022 The total quantity of Korarima sold by the traders amounted to 300 Qt. and each trader has sold on average 112.4 Qt. with an average selling price of 210 Birr per kg last year. The retailers and collectors sold Korarima at the woreda market while the wholesalers have been selling at Addis Ababa with an average selling price of 210 Birr per kg. During a discussion with traders, they reported that they obtain market information from other traders. The majority of traders use their source of capital to run their businesses. However, traders indicated that credit access for their business was poor in the study area. Concerning storage majority of traders have their storage with a maxi- mum capacity of 150 Qt. on average at a time. As reported by traders, the main constraints for them in the study area were very poor infrastructural development, poor quality supply of Korarima, and the presence of illegal traders. The average age of traders was 36.25 years which ranges between 27 and 52 years. The average family size of the traders was 5 with a minimum of 3 and a maximum of 8. Concerning educational level, the trader’s majority lies between grades two and twelve. The average market- ing experience of the traders was 8.75 with a minimum of 1 year and a maximum of 15 years of experience. 3.3.3 The Value-adding Activities of Producers or Traders The main trader’s value-adding activities in the study area were cutting, cleaning, drying, grading, transporta- tion and packaging. Figure 1 shows the value-adding functions of the producers or traders. On the other hand, Table 6 shows the value addition practices of Korarima in the study area as about 90.83% indicated that they keep the Korarima quality to provide to the market whereas 9.17% didn’t keep the quality. The sample respondents indicated the major value-adding activities conducted by the farmers in the study area were cleaning (43.1%), stor- age (27.5%), transportation (2.8%), and both cleaning and storage (21.1%) whereas storage and transportation (5.5%). About 87.5% indicated that there was a price dif- ference due to value addition with an average price dif- ference of 20-30 Birr per kg whereas 12.5% didn’t know about the price difference. Table 5. Personal characteristics of traders and buying/selling activities Variables Maximum Minimum Average Age 52 27 36.25 Family size 8 3 5.2 Education level 12 2 8.1 Experience 15 1 8.1 Total quantity purchased last year(kg) 640 2 121.8 Buying price/kg 160 110 130 Total quantity sold last year(kg) 300 2 112.4 Selling price/kg 270 125 210 Buying place Frequency % Cover transportation cost Market 80 66.7 Yes No Business center 30 25 84(70%) 36(30%) Farm gate 10 8.3 Source: own survey, 2021 Table 6. Value Addition of Korarima Value addition of Korarima Frequency Percent Keep the Korarima quality Yes 109 90.83 No 11 9.17 Value-adding activities Cleaning 47 43.1 Storage 30 27.5 Transportation 3 2.8 Cleaning and storage 23 21.1 Storage and transportation 6 5.5 Price difference due to value addition Yes 105 87.5 No 15 12.5 29 Research on World Agricultural Economy | Volume 03 | Issue 03 | September 2022 3.4 Access to Institutional Service of Farm Households 3.4.1 Access to Credit Service Finance is the crucial element starting from Korarima production up to harvesting and marketing of the product but producers do not take credit specifically for Korarima production. As depicted in Table 7, about 40.8% of sam- pled producers had access to credit while 59.2% had no access to credit in the study area. However, only 21.7% of those who received credit while 78.4% didn’t receive credit last year. The major purpose for those who received credit was input purchase, purchase of livestock for fatten- ing, and land rent purpose. The sample respondents indi- cated that the credit was provided by Omo Micro-Finance which has a problem with taking credit regarding inad- equate supply and high-interest rates. Some respondents have used their friends and relatives as a source of credit in the study area. According to the sample respondents, the reasons for not receiving the credit were high-interest rates, unfavorable repayment time, restrictive procedure, no need, lack of collateral, and fear of inability to repay. 3.4.2 Access to Extension Service Of the respondents, about 79.2% have access to an extension whereas only 20.8% of the sample respondents didn’t have access to an extension. However, concerning extension services to Korarima production last year, only 28.4% of the sample respondents have been got extension services while 71.6% didn’t get. The type of extension services that has been provided for the sample respond- ents in the study area were planting methods, harvesting and post-harvest handling price information, and market- ing of Korarima. This indicates that the extension service provided to Korarima production and marketing was very less as compared to other types of extension services provided for crops in the study area. The survey result in- dicated that the average number of contacts the extension agents made with the sample respondents was 5.5 times per month (Table 7). 3.4.3 Access to Transportation Services Concerning transportation services (Table 7), the sam- ple respondents indicated that the majority (81.7%) of those who have no means of transportation supply their Korarima to the market while only 18.3% have their trans- portation. The means of transportation for those who used to take their Korarima to the market were by cart (5%), pack animal (79.2%), and carrying and using a bicycle (15.8%). The average transportation costs per 100 kg to take to the market by motorcycle or cart were 47.26 Birr. The sample respondent also revealed that about 85% of the majority have no long-standing customers with buyers whereas only 15% have a long-standing customer with a buyer. 3.4.4 Market/Price Information Better information can improve farmers’ bargaining power, reduce search costs, and reduces transportation costs. As revealed in Table 7 below about 44.2% of re- spondents get market information whereas 59.2% of re- spondents didn’t get price information. The main source of price information that producers get for Korarima mar- keting in the study area in search of last week’s market information (37.7%), from traders (28.3%), experts com- munication (11.3%), and some respondents who sold their products without market information (22.6%). 3.4.5 Bargaining Power of the Sample Respondents Concerning negotiation on price during Korarima sell- ing (Figure 2), the majority (66.7%) of sample respond- ents indicated that the price-setting was made by buyers, 26.7% was by brokers and the rest 6.7% was made by the farmers. This result indicates that the Korarima producers have poor bargaining power on the Korarima marketing in a b c Figure 1(a-c). Value-adding activities of Korarima in the study area 30 Research on World Agricultural Economy | Volume 03 | Issue 03 | September 2022 the study area which has made them price takers. Due to low price offer by traders in the study area the Korarima producers have been discouraged in the production of this crop. This might have called the concerned body to in- tervene in such a poor Korarima marketing system in the study area to benefit smallholder Korarima producers. The result indicates that buyers have a great role in setting the price which discouraged the farmers to participate in this business here is the figure that shows the price setting of Korarima. Figure 2. Korarima price setting in the study area 3.4.6 Quantity of Korarima Produced and Marketed The sample respondents during the survey indicated that almost all respondents have been involved in Korari- ma production as well as marketing. As presented in Table 8, the average quantity of Korarima produced and mar- keted per individual sampled household head was about 1.92 quintals and 1.72 quintals respectively. According to sample respondents, the average marketing costs such as packing, loading, and transportation costs incurred during Korarima marketing per sampled household was 126.53 Birr with a minimum of 65 Birr and a maximum of 260 Birr which was based on the quantity of Korarima to be marketed. The unit marketing cost per quintal of Korarima was 73.55 Birr. The average harvesting cost per sampled individual household head was 475.86 Birr. Table 8. Quantity of Korarima produced and marketed Quantity of Korarima produced and marketed (n=120) Minimum Maximum Mean Quantity of Korarima produced per household in Qt. 0.01 8 1.92 Quantity of Korarima marketed per household in Qt. 0.01 10 1.72 Unit price per kg 30 260 114.72 The cost incurred in Korarima marketing per household (Birr) 65 260 126.5 Harvesting cost per household (Birr) 20 3000 475.86 Source: Own Survey, 2020 3.5 Korarima Value Chain and Marketing Actors and Their Function in the Chain According to survey results, five major Korarima value chain actors were identified in the study area. These are producers, collectors, wholesalers, retailers, consumers, and also other value chain supporters. Table 7. Access to services Variables Frequency % Frequency % Access to extension service Yes 95 79.2 Extension to Korarima Yes 27 28.4 No 25 20.8 No 68 71.6 Mean extension contact (month) 5.5 times Access to credit service Yes 49 40.8 Received credit Yes 26 21.7 No 71 59.2 No 94 78.3 Access to transportation Yes 22 18.3 Means of transportation Cart 6 5 No 98 81.7 Pack animal 95 79.2 Carrying & bicycle 19 15.8 Long stand customer Yes 18 15 No 102 85 Get price information Yes 53 44.2 Source of price information Traders 15 28.3 No 67 55.8 Experts 6 11.3 Last week market 20 37.7 No information 12 22.6 Source: own survey, 2021 31 Research on World Agricultural Economy | Volume 03 | Issue 03 | September 2022 Korarima producers: these are the main actors in the value chain who produces Korarima on their farmland. They were the primary link actors who cultivate and supply Kora- rima to the market. Their main source of seedlings is farmer to farmer and no support has been provided by any extension agent or government. Producers sell their produce at the farm gate or village and district markets. Collectors: These are actors that collect a large vol- ume of Korarima at the farm gate from the smallholder Korarima producer and provide it to the wholesaler in the study area. The main market outlets for the collectors in the study area were wholesalers. Wholesaler: Wholesaler is traders that collect a large volume of Korarima from collectors and mainly sell to retailers. They play a significant role in the market chain who mainly known for the purchase of bulky products with better financial and information capacity as well as reside in the town. They are major actors in the channel and they purchase Korarima either directly from the farm- er or mainly through collectors. Retailers: Retailers are known for their limited pur- chasing with low financial and information capacity. They are the main actors along the channel and deliver Kora- rima to the consumer in small amounts in the study area. Consumers: Consumers are the final purchasers of Korarima mostly from retailers for consumption purposes only and it is the last link along the channel. 3.6 Korarima Market Channels The smallholder Korarima producers have been sold using different Korarima marketing outlets. There are five Korarima marketing channels have been identified in the study area. According to survey results, it was estimated that the total amount of Korarima supplied to the market by the sampled households was 206.4 qt. The highest volume of sales of Korarima was taken in channels four and five which indicates that the flow of Korarima market in the study area is concentrated on these channels. But channels one and five are the most advantageous Kora- rima market channels for the producers; both channels make producers gain collective bargaining power and also help them get a fair market price. The market channels that have been identified in the study area were: Channel I: Producer Consumers (12.6 qt or 6.1%) Channel II: Producers Collectors Retailer Consumer (13.5 qt or 6.5%) Channel III: Producer Retailer Consumer (25.4 qt or 12.3%) Channel IV: Producers Collector Wholesaler Retailers Consumer (81.5 qt or 39.5%) Channel V: Producers Wholesaler Retailers Consumer (73.4 qt or 35.6%) 3.7 Korarima Market Performance Marketing margin analysis for each value chain ac- tor was used to determine the market performance of the Korarima. From the result, the Korarima producers’ gross profit was highest in channels I, V, and III respectively while they take the lowest gross profit when they sell to collectors in channels II and IV which accounts for 106.5 Birr/kg. This implies producers are more profitable if they sold directly to consumers, wholesalers, and retailers respectively. As indicated in Table 9, the total gross mar- keting margin (TGMM) is highest in channels IV (61.1%) and V (58.9%), and lowest in channels II (10.8%) and III (6.7%). This difference might support the theory that as the number of marketing agents increases the producer’s share decreases. For instance, without considering channel I where the producer directly sold Korarima to consum- ers, the maximum producer’s share (GMMpr) is highest in channel III which was 93.3% of the total consumers’ price. The reason is, that the more the number of middle- men in the Korarima market, the more profit they retain for their services whether they add value to the item or not. This is in line with the findings of Kassa et al. [12] who suggested that the share of market intermediaries in the consumer’s price was large and there was a need to reduce market intermediaries to minimize the marketing margins. 3.8 Korarima Value Chain Map and Market Route in the South Omo Zone Value chain mapping is the process of developing a vis- ual depiction of the basic structure of the value chain and illustrates the way the product flows from raw material to end markets and presents how the industry functions. It highlights the point that most goods and services are pro- duced by a complex and sequenced set of activities [13]. As discussed by scholars Springer-Heinze [14]; Lundy et al. [15]; Gebre et al. [16] value chain map is usually an integral part of most value chain analyses that clearly show chain ac- tors, interrelationships, and functional roles, stakeholders involved in the chain, boundaries of the system, a flow of goods, payments, information along the chain, and their businesses interconnection to form one system. Hence, the below Figure 3 discussed Korarima value chain actors (main actors and supporters) are the major components of these Korarima value chain maps. The market route is the pathway to providing the product in front of your cus- tomers and identifying the most effective channels for the product that will maximize profit. Deciding how to sell and selecting the right route to market is essential to the success of any product or service (Figure 4). 32 Research on World Agricultural Economy | Volume 03 | Issue 03 | September 2022 Table 9. Korarima profit margin of value chain actors along different channels (Birr/kg) Actors Korarima marketing channels I II III IV V Producers(P) Marketing cost 2 0.5 1.5 0.5 1.5 Selling price 115 107 112 107 113 Gross profit 113 106.5 110.5 106.5 111.5 GMMP (%) 100 89.2 93.3 38.9 41.1 Local collector(C) Purchase price 107 107 Marketing cost 2 3 Selling price 117 120 Gross profit 8 10 GMMC (%) 8.3 4.7 Retailer(R) Purchase price 117 112 250 250 Marketing cost 0.25 0.25 2 2 Selling price 120 120 275 275 Gross profit 2.75 7.75 23 23 GMMR (%) 2.5 6.7 9.1 9.1 Wholesaler(W) Purchase price 120 113 Marketing cost 5 7 Selling price 250 250 Gross profit 125 130 GMMW (%) 47.3 49.8 TGMM (%) 0 10.8 6.7 61.1 58.9 Source: own survey, 2020 Figure 3. Value chain map of Korarima in South Omo zone 33 Research on World Agricultural Economy | Volume 03 | Issue 03 | September 2022 Figure 4. Market routes of Korarima 3.10 Korarima Marketing Outlets Choice of proper marketing outlets is one of the most important farm household decisions to sell their produce. The sampled respondents were asked if they choose dif- ferent Korarima market outlets to maximize the profit from their outlet choice decision. Consequently, they reported that different Korarima market outlets were used to sell their produce. These Korarima market outlets include collectors, wholesalers, retailers, and consumers. These outlets are mostly chosen in combination with one another. Table 10 shows the different Korarima market outlets used by the Korarima producers when selling their Korarima. One of the most commonly used market outlets by producers is the collectors’ outlet which was chosen by about 83.4% of respondents with a mean supply of 165 kg, while about 75% of respondents sold to wholesalers with a mean supply of 164 kg. As retailers are also common Korarima marketing outlets in the study area, around 35% of sample households sold to the retailers with a mean supply of 134 kg. As revealed by respondents the reason for choosing those marketing outlets was since there is a price difference among buyers (90%), closeness in dis- tance (6.7%), and due to transport availability (3.3%) in the study area. 3.11 Determinants of Market Outlet Choices of Smallholder Korarima Producers In the study areas, Korarima producers have differ- ent market outlet choice options to sell their products. However, various factors affect producers to select the appropriate Korarima channels. The decision of producers to choose such market outlets was determined by various demographic, socioeconomic, and institutional factors. The Wald chi-square statistic was used to test the overall significance of variables. As presented in Table 11, the Wald test, Wald chi2 (36) = 630.25, p = 0.000 is significant at the 1% level, which shows that the subset of coefficients of the model is jointly significant and that the explanatory power of the factors included in the model is satisfactory; thus, the MVP model fits the data reasonably well. Likewise, the model is significant because the null that the choice deci- sion of the three Korarima market outlets is independent was rejected at a 1% significance level. The results of the likelihood ratio test in the model (LR chi2 (3) = 7.30897, Prob > chi2 = 0.0627) indicate the null that the independ- ence between market outlet choice decision (ρ21 = ρ31 = ρ32 = 0) is rejected at 10% significance level and there are Table 10. Description of Korarima market outlets Decision Korarima market outlets Collectors Wholesalers Retailers Frequency % Frequency % Frequency % Yes 100 83.4 90 75 42 35 No 20 16.7 30 25 78 65 Supply to each outlet Mean (kg) SD Mean (kg) SD Mean (kg) SD 165 118.4 164 98.3 134 63.9 Reason for the price difference Frequency % The price difference between other buyers 108 90 Closeness in distance 8 6.7 Transport availability 4 3.3 34 Research on World Agricultural Economy | Volume 03 | Issue 03 | September 2022 significant joint correlations for two estimated coefficients across the equations in the models. This confirms that separate estimation of a choice decision of these outlets is biased, and the decisions to choose the three Korarima marketing outlets are interdependent household decisions. There are differences in market outlet selection behavior among producers, which are reflected in the likelihood ra- tio statistics of an estimated correlation matrix. Separately considered, the ρ values (ρij) indicate the degree of cor- relation between each pair of dependent variables. The ρ21 (correlation between the choice for wholesaler and collec- tor outlet) is negatively interdependent and significant at the 5% probability level whereas ρ31 (correlation between the choice for retailer and collector outlet) is positively in- terdependent and significant at the 10% probability level. This result leads us to the conclusion that Korarima pro- ducers delivering to the wholesaler outlet are less likely to deliver to a collector (ρ21). Likewise, Korarima producers delivering to the retailer outlet are more likely to deliver to collector outlets (ρ31). This indicates a competitive re- lationship between wholesalers with collector outlets and retailers with collector outlets. The simulated maximum likelihood (SML) estimation result shows that the probability that Korarima producers choose collector, wholesaler, and retailer market outlets was 82.2%, 73.6%, and 35.5%, respectively. This indi- cates that the likelihood of choosing a collector outlet is relatively high (82.2%) as compared to the probability of choosing a wholesaler (73.6%), and retailer (35.5%). The joint probabilities of success or failure of the three outlet choices also suggest that households are more likely to succeed in jointly choosing the three outlets. The likeli- hood of households jointly choosing the three outlets simultaneously is 21.8%, while their failure to jointly choose is 2.1%. The results of the MVP model (Table 12) revealed that some variables were significant at more than one market outlet while some variables were significant in only one market outlet. Among twelve explanatory variables in- cluded in the model, two variables (sex & credit access) affected significantly collector market outlets; three vari- ables (price information, distance to market & and family size) significantly affected wholesaler outlets; four vari- ables (extension contact, credit access, family size, and price information) significantly affected retailer market outlet choice at different probability levels. Distance from the nearest market was found to have a negative and significant relationship with the likelihood of choosing a wholesaler outlet at less than a 1% signifi- cant level. This result revealed that for those households whose residence from the nearest market increases by a kilometer, the likelihood of households choosing a whole- saler market outlet decreases by 139.3%, ceteris paribus. This implies that households located far from the nearest market are less likely in delivering Korarima produce to the wholesaler market outlet. The reason for this is that farmers located distant from the market are weakly acces- sible to the wholesaler market outlet, and the closer to the Table 11. Overall fitness, probabilities, and correlation matrix of the market outlets from the MVP model output Attributes Collector Wholesaler Retailer Predicted probability 0.822 0.736 0.355 The joint probability of success 0.218 The joint probability of failure 0.021 Estimated correlation matrix ρ1 ρ2 ρ3 ρ1 1 ρ2 –0.362**(0.161) 1 ρ3 0.348*(0.188) –0.141(0.193) 1 Likelihood ratio test of ρ21 = ρ31 = ρ32 = 0: chi2(3) = 7.30897 Prob > chi2 = 0.0627 Number of draws (#) 5 Number of observations 120 Log pseudo-likelihood –159.51562 Wald chi2(36) 630.25 Prob > chi2 0.0000*** Note: *, ** and *** significant at 5, 10 and 1% respectively. 35 Research on World Agricultural Economy | Volume 03 | Issue 03 | September 2022 market the lesser will be the transportation cost and time spent. This result is consistent with Getahun [17] and Ale- mu et al. [18] who found that distance to the market reduces the likelihood of producers selling to wholesaler market outlets. The frequency of extension contact has a negative and significant influence on retailer outlet choice decisions at a 1% significance level. Extension services increase the ability of producers to acquire important price information as well as enable the Korarima producers to improve pro- duction approaches, hence leading to more output which in turn increases producers’ ability to choose the best market outlet for their product. However, no extension services have been provided regarding Korarima produc- tion or propagation for producers other than their cultural practices. Thus, households who were not visited by ex- tension agents were less likely to deliver Korarima by re- tailer outlets. This is because producers who have no price information about Korarima want to sell their produce at their farm gate for collectors or village market. Access to price information is positively and signifi- cantly associated with the likelihood of choosing whole- saler and retailer outlets at 10 and 1% levels of signifi- cance, respectively. Access to recent price information improves producers’ selling prices because market price information helps producers to analyze the price differ- ence in their locality and the nearby main market which increases the probability of choosing wholesalers and retailers which give a relatively higher price to producers. Market information has a positive and significant effect on retailer channel choice decisions of potato producers [19]. Access to credit services is positively and significantly associated with the likelihood of choosing collector out- lets at less than a 10% level of significance. As the farm- ers have accessed credit service, the probability of par- ticipating in a collector market outlet increases by 64.5%, ceteris paribus. The possible explanation is that getting credit services may enhance their production capacity and increase supply. So if they produce more products they simply choose to sell collector market outlet at their farm gate. The likelihood of households to choose a re- tailer market outlet was negatively influenced by access to credit services at less than 1% levels of significance. The finding revealed that as the farmers have not accessed credit service, the probability of participating in a retailer market outlet decreases by 102.2%, ceteris paribus. The possible explanation is that obtaining an appropriate Ko- rarima market outlet particularly nearby urban retailers is time consumable and needs transportation access. Family size is negatively associated with the choice of wholesaler outlet at less than a 5% level of signifi- cance. This is since households with a larger family size may take the product to market in a different way or sale at the farm gate to a collector or take it to a retailer in a minimum amount, and less likely to deliver to wholesaler market outlet. The result revealed that in households whose family size increase by one more, the probability of participating in a wholesaler market outlet decreases by 14.1%, ceteris paribus. On the other hand, family size is positively associated with the choice of retailer outlet at less than 1% level of significance. This is since house- holds with a larger family size have plenty of labor force to deliver Korarima to retailer market outlets at nearby urban markets. This is in line with the Tewodros [20] who indicated that large family sizes have better labor endow- ment so that households are in a position to travel to get retailers in the district or nearby town markets. The sex of the respondents is negatively and signifi- cantly associated with the likelihood of choosing collector outlets at less than a 1% level of significance. This result revealed that male-headed households are less likely to choose collector market outlets than their female counter- parts. This means that male-headed households prefer to sell to a wholesaler at the nearby market than female and female-headed households prefer to sell the Korarima at their farm gate because females fulfill their daily family demands. As compared to female-headed households, the likelihood of choosing collector market outlets by male- headed households decreases by 426.7%, ceteris paribus. 3.12 Opportunities and Constraints along the Ko- rarima Value Chain in the Study Major constraints and opportunities along the Kora- rima value chain in the study were identified in terms of input supply, production, and marketing. As seen in Table 13 below, major constraints in input supply are lack of improved variety or sacker and absence of fertilizer use whereas shortage of land, no or weak extension services, disease, and post-harvesting problems are the production constraints. Moreover, there is a serious marketing prob- lem of Korarima in the study area such as infrastructures like roads, no brand name of the product, and low farm gate price. The major opportunity in input supply is a demand of producers for improved variety or sucker. On the other hand, suitable agro ecology, fertile land, and the high demand of consumers are opportunities for produc- tion. Intervention areas identified in input supply are a research effort to release new variety and extension efforts to further enhance the Korarima production in the area. Moreover, there is a serious road problem to transport the product to the market. 36 Research on World Agricultural Economy | Volume 03 | Issue 03 | September 2022 4. Conclusions Korarima is the main potential crop and income source for the study area. However, there is no brand indicating this crop, inadequate infrastructural development, and market accessibility, no extension services, and weak provision of adequate, timely, reliable, and formal market information in the study area. And also Korarima in the study area has been marketed to the central market under the name of Basketo Korarima and difficult to trace up to the end market to identify the margin distribution along the chain. Moreover, the results of a multivariate probit model indicated that credit access, family size, and price information to farmers significantly affected the market outlet choice decisions in one or another way. Therefore, it is better to work on the brand name of this particular crop to trace it up to the end market since it is an economically important crop for the study area. Adequate infrastructural development and market accessibility with a good facility are needed to enable the smallholder Korarima producers in choosing better market outlets to increase the benefit. Extension services provision regarding the Korarima production, fertilizer use, and improved Korarima variety supply to the smallholder farmer in the study area. The provision of adequate, timely, reliable, and formal market information from the concerned body is essential to en- hance Korarima producers’ benefit and bargaining power by avoiding information asymmetry. Provision of credit access to producers is an important factor that enhances Table 12. Multivariate probit estimations for determinants of market outlet choices of Korarima producers Variable Market outlet choices Collectors Wholesalers Retailer Coeff(Std.err) Coeff(Std.err) Coeff(Std.err) Sex –4.267*** (0.367) –0.320(0.554) –0.129(0.652) Age 0.017(0.022) 0.030(0.019) –0.004(0.020) Education level 0.001(0.042) 0.033(.042) 0.066(0.042) Experience 0.002(0.015) –0.005(.017) –0.004(0.017) Annual income –0.00003(0.00002) 0.00001(0.00002) –4.54e-06(0.00002) Quantity produced –0.169(0.103) 0.197(0.188) 0.053(0.104) Land size –0.049(0.088) –0.038(0.086) –0.125(0.088) Access to credit 0.645*(0.371) 0.300(0.308) –1.022***(0.299) Price information 0.327(0.351) 0.528*(0.319) 1.395***(0.316) Market distance –0.044(0.416) –1.393***(0.397) –0.209(0.410) Extension contact 0.029(0.021) –0.014(0.015) –0.053***(0.021) Family size –0.042(0.069) –0.141**(0.060) 0.210***(0.074) Constant 4.476***(0.838) 0.245(0.873) –1.752*(0.971) *, **, and *** = significance level at 10%, 5%, and 1%, respectively. Coeff = coefficient, Std.err = standard errors in parentheses Table 13. Opportunities and constraints along the chain Input supply Production Marketing Constraints -Lack of improved variety -Absence of fertilizer use practice -Shortage of land -No provision of extension services -Disease -Post-harvesting problem - Serious infrastructural problems -Low price at the farm gate -no brand name Opportunities - Demand for improved variety -Suitable agro ecology -Fertile land -High demand -Highly demanded -High production Interventions needed Research Extension services Infrastructure development 37 Research on World Agricultural Economy | Volume 03 | Issue 03 | September 2022 the production capacity of producers and thereby enables them to choose a better outlet. Acknowledgment We acknowledge the Southern Agricultural Research Institute, Jinka Agricultural Research center (JARC) for funding this research. Conflict of Interest The authors disclosed no possible conflicts of interest. References [1] Ethiopian Economic Association, 2008. Report On The Ethiopian Economy: Volume VII. Addis Ababa, Ethiopian. [2] Dessalegn, G., 2015. Analysis of Factors Determin- ing the Supply of Ethiopian Korarima Spice (Aframo- mumcorrorima): A Case from Bench Maji Zone of SNNPR, Ethiopia. European Journal of Business and Management. 7(1), 56-63. [3] International Trade Centre, 2010. Spice Sub-sector Strategy for Ethiopia. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. [4] Peethambaran, C.K., Girma, H., Haimanot, M., et al., 2016. Spice India, English. [5] South Omo zone, Korarima & spice department, 2009. Annual Korarima & spice production and pro- ductivity report. [6] Yemane, T., 1967. Statistics, an introductory analysis, and ed., New York: Harper & Row. [7] Belderbos, R., Carree, M., Diederen, B., et al., 2004. Heterogeneity in R&D cooperation strategies. Inter- national Journal of Industrial Organization. 22(8-9), 1237-1263. [8] Melese, T., Goshu, D., Tilahun, A., 2018. Determi- nants of outlet choices by smallholder onion farmers in Fogera district Amhara Region, Northwestern Ethiopia. Journal of Horticulture and Forestry. 10(3), 27-35. [9] Dessie, A.B., Abate, T.M., Mekie, T.M., 2018. Fac- tors affecting market outlet choice of wheat produc- ers in North Gondar Zone, Ethiopia. Agriculture & Food Security. 7(1), 91. [10] Getasetegn, M., Tefera, Y., 2016. Biological Activi- ties and Valuable Compounds from Five Medicinal Plants. Natural Products Chemistry & Research. 4(4), 1-10. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4172/2329-6836.1000220 [11] Lupi, A., Mitiku, T., Temtme, S., et al., 2016. Influ- ence of rooting media on nursery performance of Korarima (Aframomum corrorima) at Tepi, South- western part of Ethiopia. Journal of Horticulture. 3(1), 1-4. [12] Kassa, T., Akililu, A., Tesfaye, G., et al., 2020. Value chain analysis of banana in Bench Maji and Sheka Zones of Southern Ethiopia, Cogent Food & Agricul- ture. 6(1), 1785103. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/23311932.2020.1785103 [13] Humphrey, J., Navas-Alemán, L., 2010. Value chains, donor interventions, and poverty reduction: A review of donor practice. IDS Research Report No. 63. Brighton, UK: Institute of Development Studies (IDS). [14] Springer-Heinze, A., 2007. Value Links manual: The methodology of value chain promotion. Eschborn, Germany: Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ) GmbH. [15] Lundy, M., Amrein, A., Hurtado, J., et al., 2014. Link methodology: A participatory guide to business mod- els that link smallholders to markets (Second ed.). Centro International de Agricultural Tropical (CIAT). http://ciatlibrary.ciat.cgiar.org/articulos/ciat/Method- ology.pdf. [16] Gebre, G., Rik, E., Kijne, A., et al., 2020. Analysis of banana value chain in Ethiopia: Approaches to sustainable value chain development. Cogent Food & Agriculture. 6(1), 1-31. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/23311932.2020.1742516 [17] Getahun, T., 2018. Determinants of commercializa- tion and market outlet choices of Tef: the case of smallholder farmers in Dendi District of Oromia, Central Ethiopia, Haramaya University. [18] Alemu, A., Erik, M., Miet, M., et al., 2012. Vertical coordination in the local food chains: evidence from farmers in Ethiopia. International Journal of Eco- nomics and Finance Studies. 4(1), 11-20. [19] Bezabih, E., Mengistu, K., Jeffreyson, M., et al., 2015. Factors affecting market outlet choice of po- tato producers in Eastern Hararghe Zone, Ethiopia. Journal of Economics and Sustainable Development. 6(15), 159-173. [20] Tewodros, T., 2014. Analysis of Chickpea Value Chain and Determinants of Market Options Choice in Selected Districts of Southern Ethiopia. School of Environment, Gender and Development Studies, College of Agriculture, Hawassa University, Ethiopia. Journal of Agricultural Science. 6(10), 1916-9752.