Economic analysis of alternative systems for sorghum production in Southern Mali Felix Badoloa, Bekele Kotub, and Birhanu Zemadim Birhanua aInternational Crop Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT) bInternational Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA) Africa RISING West Africa Project Phase 1 Legacy Workshop 12 – 13 December, 2016 Bamako, Mali

Introduction Why must we move towards alternative systems for cereal production in Mali? Most of the poor in Sub-Saharan Africa and particularly in Mali depend on agriculture for survival Malian agricultural sector is dominated by small family farms (68%) who produce mainly millet and sorghum covering approximately 80% of the cultivated areas, and contributing to 49% of household food needs (Fall, 2011) These two cereals are characterized by a persistent low of yields mainly due to poor soil fertility, low input use, and continued practice of traditional production techniques. Lack or low use of innovative technologies is a major constraint to high productivity in agricultural sector in Mali

Introduction Africa Research In sustainable Intensification for The Next Generation (Africa RISING) Project Increase adoption of sustainable intensification innovations that improve productivity, product quality, nutrition, income, market access, and conserve the natural resources Fertilizer options for sorghum production have been included: (T1) traditional system as a control treatment, (T2) treatment with only manure, (T3) treatment with only mineral fertilizer, and (T4) treatment with manure and mineral fertilizer

Objective and Research approach These fertilizer options have been compared and contrasted with respect to biological parameters. However, economic analysis is missing. The article aims to compare and contrast the four crop treatments with respects their economic advantages and production risks using stochastic dominance analysis. Most of farmers produce enough for two main objectives: food self-sufficient objective (grain yields analysis), and cash income objective (net return analysis). Stochastic dominance analysis is based on two rules: The first rule assumes that human beings prefer more to less of most goods, and states that 𝐹 dominates 𝐺 if the cumulative distribution 𝐹(𝑥) is to the right of the cumulative distribution 𝐺(𝑥) for all levels of outcome. The second rule is based on the fact that, in addition to preferring more to less, most human beings prefer to avoid low value outcomes. The area under the cumulative distribution curve indicates the tendency of an alternative to produce low value outcomes. An alternative is dominated if the area under its cumulative probability curve is larger at every outcome level than that of the alternative.

Results and discussions Average grain yields for the two years for T2 (1051 kg/ha), T3 (1287 kg/ha), and with T4 (1495 kg/ha) were significantly higher than control treatment (847 kg/ha). T1, T2, and T3 are the dominated technologies, while T4 is not dominated by any other treatment using either first or second stochastic dominance rule. Treatment Year 2014 2015 Mean (2014 - 2015)   (Kg/ha) Traditional system (control treatment) 811a 884a 847a Treatment with only manure 1,025b 1,076b 1,051b Treatment with only fertilizer 1,267c 1,308c 1,287c Treatment with manure and fertilizer 1,479d 1,511d 1,495d

Results and discussions Average net returns for manure and mineral fertilizer treatment were 40% significantly higher than treatment with only mineral fertilizer, and 45% significantly higher than treatment only manure. Treatment with manure and mineral fertilizer dominated the three other cropping treatments under the first stochastic dominance rule. 2014 - 2015 Treatments Gross margin Total cost Net return   (FCFA/ha) Traditional system (control treatment) 31,851a 4,218a 27,633a Treatment with only manure 49,685b 7,899b 41,787b Treatment with only fertilizer 61,788c 18,190c 43,598d Treatment with manure and fertilizer 82,950d 22,138d 60,811d

Areas for future research Concluding remarks Manure and mineral fertilizer treatment has highest grain yields and net returns compared to three other treatments (control treatment, manure treatment, and mineral fertilizer treatment) Given farmers prefer more to less, and also prefer avoid low value outcomes, they could make the choice of manure and mineral fertilizer treatment in the sorghum production systems The adoption of this technology should be accompanied by the development strategies of inputs market particularly manure and mineral fertilizers in order to make them available for the smallholder farmers Areas for future research Short term analysis focused on annual on-farm data covering only two cropping seasons. Some long term changes related to labour constraints, land availability, and climate change effects could influence the results. Difficulties related to availability of mineral fertilizer could constraint farmers to come back to their old practice. Research on fertilization systems for sorghum production should take into account these constraints in the analysis.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION