Content uploaded by J. C. Coelho
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by J. C. Coelho on Dec 27, 2019
Content may be subject to copyright.
Official Publication of Direct Research Journal of Agriculture and Food Science: Vol.7 (9), September 2019, ISSN 2354-4147
Direct Research Journal of Agriculture and Food Science
Vol.7 (9), pp. 250-263, September 2019
ISSN 2354-4147
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3458213
Article Number: DRJAFS84043561
Copyright © 2019
Author(s) retain the copyright of this article
https://directresearchpublisher.org/drjafs/
Full Length Research Paper
Characterization of rice production system in Camacupa
and Catabola municipalities of the province of Bié in Angola
Chiambo, P. J.1*, Coelho, J. P.2, Soares, F. B.3 and Salumbo, A.4
1Tropical Knowledge and Management Program, Universidade Nova de Lisboa-NOVA School of Business and
Economics, Portugal.
2School of Agriculture, University of Lisbon, Portugal.
3Nova School of Business and Economics, New University of Lisbon, Portugal.
4University José Eduardo dos Santos, Huambo, Angola.
*Corresponding Author E-mail: paschiambo81@gmail.com
Received 27 August 2019; Accepted 17 September, 2019
An assessment of rice production and processing in Camacupa and
Catabola municipalities of the province of Bié in Angola was
carried out in this research. According to the results obtained the
planting period for rice in the area was mostly between October
and November. Basically 100% of the farmers do the rice seeding
directly to the permanent place where it germinates and grows to
maturity. Results revealed that 61% of farmers in those two
municipalities use manual labor in seedbed preparation, while
49% use tractors but complemented with manual instruments. It
was also observed from the results that the farmers in the study
area predominantly used 12-24-12 (N-P-K) and ammonium
sulfate (NH4SO2). The application method was mostly by manual
broadcasting over the planted area. Results also recorded that rice
harvesting usually takes place from May to June. All the farmers
interviewed harvest their rice manually by using knife and sickle,
and they thresh the harvested rice manually by spreading rice on
canvas and tapping with a stick. The paddy yield varied from 200-
1800 kg.ha-1 depending upon the availability of resources,
management of crop and the socio-economic status of the
growers. The paddy resulted is packed in a bag, mainly, or in
bottle if it is destined to seed. Results also showed that
mechanization of rice production and processing has not received
much attention since most of the farmers still use the traditional
manual labor and traditional in the production and processing
rice. The study also found that rice productivity is positively
correlated with the level of education, the tractor usage, the rate of
application of fertilizers, the sowing date (the later the better, the
line coverage, the place of sale (in markets is better) and the
processing methods (mechanized is better). On other hand,
productivity is negatively correlated with the municipality
(Catabola is better), the village (Ndembei, Kalila and Kalohuma,
are better) and the age of the farmers (i.e. the younger the greater
workforce and higher productivity).
Keywords: Rice production and processing, Angola, province of
Bié, traditional and business sectors
INTRODUCTION
Rice production systems vary greatly from country to
country as well as from location to location which affects
the performance and the potential of its production. Rice
is cultivated under temperate, subtropical, and tropical
climatic conditions with the weather varying from arid and
semiarid to sub humid and humid (Rao et al., 2017;
Okeke and Oluka, 2017). The cultivation of rice begins by
land preparation in order to prepare the seedbed, which
could include land clearing, construction of dikes, soil
tillage, ploughing and leveling with the aid of earth-
moving equipment, depending on the size farm (Ayanda
and Folounsho, 2019). After land preparation, planting
begins by planting either water soaked rice or dry rice
seeds. Seeds can be sown either manually (in small
farms) or mechanically (in large farms), but in developed
countries low flying planes broadcast rice seeds onto
already prepared fields. If rice is not planted directly to
the field, after one month or less of growth, the seedlings
Official Publication of Direct Research Journal of Agriculture and Food Science: Vol.7 (9), September 2019, ISSN 2354-4147
Chiambo et al. 251
are transplanted in bunches from nursery beds to main
field. First weeding is done 1 month after transplanting or
21 days after germination for those planted directly to the
field. Second weeding is generally done 36 days after
first weeding (Okeke and Oluka, 2017). According to
Corranza and Treakle, (2014) and Carriço, (2017), 60%
of African farmers use manual labor since sowing to
processing.
Threshing of rice follows the harvesting operation and
in a full-mechanized system, harvesting and threshing
are done simultaneously with combined harvester. After
harvesting, rice is threshed manually or mechanically and
it is packed in bags of 10, 25 or 50 kg. Before milling, rice
grain is dried in order to reduce the moisture content to
about 19% to avoid breakage of seeds during milling. The
drying can be done naturally by sunshine spreading the
rice on the tarpaulin (developing countries), or by drying
machines through artificially heated air (developed
countries). After rice is processed at a mill using
automated processes, the paddy rice undergoes many
processes like hulling, polishing, grading, destoning, etc.,
before marketing or storage (Okeke and Oluka, 2017).
The production and processing of rice in Central Plateau
of Angola is mostly done by traditional or mechanized
methods. Studies made by Chiambo et al. (2019) showed
that there are two types of rice production systems,
namely the permanent flooding system, which is greatly
practiced by the business sector, and the rain-fed
system, practiced by the traditional sector. The high level
of food imports in the country demand adequate attention
and assistance to the family farming and processors of
agricultural food materials. Various agricultural wastes,
such as rice straw, are being used for animal feed and
manure. After maize and cassava, rice is one of the most
valuable food staples for a large share of Angolan
population (Chiambo et al., 2019). However,
mechanization of its production and processing in many
rural areas has not received much attention making
production, processing and even storage difficult for the
farmers.
The main issue of rice production in Central Plateau of
Angola is that farmers face difficulties in its production
and processing because of their poor knowledge of
newer methods of land preparation such as tillage, seed
planting or sowing, fertilizer application, weed and pest
control methods, harvesting, threshing, processing and
storage of the farm product (Chiambo et al., 2019).
Agronomic practice is the key issue that play crucial
role for increasing crop productivity. However, we do not
find any study to deal with farmers’ practice, productivity
of rice crops and representation of women in agricultural
in particular in the Bié region. Thus, the present study
was undertaken to generate valuable information
regarding agronomic practice, performance of rice
cultivation in different seasons and roles of women in
households in Camacupa and Catabola municipalities.
Therefore, the aim of this research is to obtain data on
rice production and processing in Central Plateau of
Angola, which will guide the government, the agricultural
policy makers, the students and the researchers in
devising measures for improving/ or mechanizing rice
production and processing in the area. The specific
objectives of the study were as follows:
(a) Describe rice cropping systems, status of varietal
adoptions, farmers’ crop management practice and level
of access to extension services.
(b) Assess the profitability of rice grown in the different
seasons.
(c) Evaluate roles of women in farming and other
decision-making process.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Study area
The province of Bié has been purposely chosen for the
reason that rice is historically cultivated in the region
where its inhabitants cultivate rice by habit and/or
tradition using rudimentary exploitation techniques. Rice
cultivation in the province of Bié focuses mainly on river
basins, wetland areas and highlands areas in the rainy
season, involving poorly drained and periodically flooded
explanations. Uncontrolled flooding or flooding rice are
produced with the highest specific incidence in the
municipalities of Camacupa and Catabola (Diniz, 1998).
Our study is directed at these two municipalities of the
province of Bié (Figure 1). Camacupa is a municipality of
the province of Bié in Angola, located north of the capital
city Cuito and represents the geodesic center of Angola.
It has 9,469 km2 and about 289 thousand inhabitants. It is
bordered to the north by the municipalities of Nharea and
Luquembe, to the east by the municipalities of Cuemba,
Moxico and Lucha, to the south by the municipality of
Chitembo and to the west by the municipalities of
Catabola and Cuito. Catabola is a town and municipality
in Bié Province in central Angola which is located 52.5
kilometers northeast of Cuito, and 15 kilometers on the
road to Camacupa and Catabola municipalities were
purposely selected for this study based on their
agronomic suitability and tradition of growing rice (Diniz,
1988; Chiambo et al., 2019).
Methods
The study of the traditional rice sector included the
collection of primary data through a semi-structured
questionnaire and secondary data from published and
unpublished reports. The objective of the study was
clearly explained to farmers for developing rapport with
the villages to generate reliable data. The field survey
was conducted covering all major rice-growing ecosystems
Official Publication of Direct Research Journal of Agriculture and Food Science: Vol.7 (9), September 2019, ISSN 2354-4147
Direct Res. J. Agric. Food Sci. 252
Figure 1. Camacupa and Catabola municipalities
of Camacupa and Catabola municipalities to understand
the cultural practices used by farmers, production
constraints, type of variety of seed used and mode of
implementation in the field. The socio-economic profile,
land ownership, rice management practices, biotic and
abiotic stresses that limit rice productivity, harvest and
post-harvest management practices and farmers
perception on rice cultivation technology were also
observed. Six villages out of 41 of Camacupa and five
villages out of 35 of Catabola municipalities covering all
major rice-growing eco-systems were random selected.
Catabola and Camacupa have a total of 514,000
inhabitants spread over 76 villages of which 1.903 are
farmers involved in various agricultural activities (RGPH,
2014). The sample was chosen at random from rice
farmers covering 14.4% of villages (11) and 5.7% of
farmers (110).The survey were done from June to
October. Each farmer was individually surveyed in his/her
own language while working in the field to ensure the
reliability of their claims. Male respondents were asked
about role of women in household and agricultural
activities and participation of women in decision-making
process.
The total land area owned by farmers surveyed in both
municipalities was about 15 ha. All the 110 farmers
surveyed practiced dry seeding in rain-fed conditions. In
order to understand the functioning of the rice value chain
(rice row) in the business sector, a unique interview was
done to the head of Farm Arrozeira Society of
Camacupa. In addition, the rice production system
adopted in major irrigation and rain-fed rice ecosystems
were also characterized. The data collected were cleaned
before entering into computer and after they were treated
and analyzed by using the statistical program Statistica
10 version. The treatment of data involved Descriptive
Statistics (expressed using numerical frequencies and
percentages presented in descriptive statistical tables
and figures), Analysis of Variance and comparison of
means and multi regression methods.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Social characteristics of the farmers
Table 1 presents the data of some of the social
characteristics (Age, Marital status and Gender) of the
110 rice producers of the sample. In terms of age, the
results showed that 35.45% of the respondents and rice
producers are in the age group of 40-50, with a global
age mean of 48.92 years. About 58% of the respondents
are less than 50. Concerning the marital status, most of
the respondents are single 75.5% (83). This means that
middle age farmers mostly practice rice farming. This
finding is consistent with the findings of Faust and
Christopher, (2015) who report that the mean age of rice
farmers in their study was 49 years. This is only natural
since the middle age classes, who are physically fit to
Official Publication of Direct Research Journal of Agriculture and Food Science: Vol.7 (9), September 2019, ISSN 2354-4147
Chiambo et al. 253
Table 1. Social characteristics of the farmers (Age, Marital status and Gender).
Age
Marital status (Ms)
Gender (G)
Years
Freq %
Average
(years) Ms Freq % G Freq %
20-30 6 5.45
48.92
Single 83 75.5 Male 74 67.27
30-40 19 17.27 Married 17 15.45 Female 36 32.73
40-50 39 3545 Widow 10 9.09
50-60 35 31.82
60-70 5 4.55
70-80 6 5.45
Total 110 100
110 100
110 100
Source: Field Survey, 2018.
Table 2. Social and economic characteristic of the farmers (Years of education, Household
number and Plot size).
Years of education
Household number
Plot size (sq. meters)
Years
Freq.
%
Number
Freq
.
%
Size
Freq
.
%
0 23 20.91 1 4 3.64 0.00< x ≤ 5.000 108 98.18
1 41 37.27 2 14 12.73
5.000< x ≤ 10.000 1 0.91
2 20 18.18 3 16 14.55
10.000< x ≤ 15.000 0 0.00
3 15 13.64 4 23 20.91
15.000< x ≤ 20.000 1 0.91
4 6 5.45 5 17 15.45
5 2 1.82 6 9 8.18
6 2 1.82 7 9 8.18
9 1 0.91 9 10 9.09
10 0 0.00 10 8 7.27
Total 110 100 Total 110 100 Total 110 100
Source: Field Survey, 2018.
withstand the stress and risks involved in rice production,
and are more mentally alert to embrace new techniques
of production. In addition, male farmers that represent
67.27% of sampled farmers dominate rice production in
the study area. This is in contrast with Ibitoye et al.
(2012) who found out that there were more female rice
farmers than males in their study area.
Table 2 presents the data of social and economic
characteristics of the sampled rice producer’s farmers
(Years of education, Household number and Plot size).
Theoretically, the level of education will favor the
adoption of new technologies. Unfortunately, in our
sample, 10% of the farmers have more than 4 years of
education. Concerning the Household number, most of
the respondents have less than 5 people (74; 67, 27%).
Lastly, the results showed that farmers in the study area
are very small scale farmers (the mean plot size is 1360.
52 square meters, and 98.18% (108) of it are lower than
0.5 hectare) what makes mechanization difficult. This
translates into the bulk of rice production for subsistence
needs leaving little space for commercial purposes. Also,
Ibitoye et al. (2012) and Faust and Christopher, (2015)
confirmed that (53.00%) of rice farmers in their studies
areas cultivated between 1-3 hectares.
Rice farmers experience, reason for growing rice and
land tenure system
Table 3 shows that rice farming is practiced amongst
farmers in the study area (40.3% with less than 5 years of
experience), the average being 10.75 years. Table 3 also
explains the various reasons that have motivated farmers
to engage on rice production. The main emphasis is that
80% (88) cultivate for reasons of habits or tradition of the
village, while the minority does it for reasons of food taste
19% (21) and 0.9% (1) does it for test or pleasure.
Concerning the land tenure regime, about 33.7% (37) are
the owners of their plots, 21.7% (24) cultivate it under
occupation, 20.4% (22) has been ceded to them by the
interest showed in production. 17.1% (19) cultivates
lands inherited from their ancestors, and 7.1% (8) own
the land for usufruct, being this last a land tenure regime
that imposes restrictions on long-term investments and
loans.
Crop management practices
Equipment’s usage
The entire population sampled in the two municipalities
uses manual instruments in all cultural operations, from
soil preparation to processing. In our sample, 100% (110)
use the hoe to prepare the soil, 11.8% (13) use rake for
soil leveling, 50% uses machetes to cut trees, 70.9% (78)
use knives and 29.1% (32) used sickles for harvesting.
Only 44.5% (49) of the farmers use a tractor at the first
plowing complementing the hoe, and a minority of 2.7%
Official Publication of Direct Research Journal of Agriculture and Food Science: Vol.7 (9), September 2019, ISSN 2354-4147
Direct Res. J. Agric. Food Sci. 254
Table 3. Rice farmers’ experience, reason for growing rice and land tenure system.
Experience in Rice farming
Rice growing
Land tenure system
Years Freq. %
Average
(years) Reason Freq.
% Tenure Freq.
%
0< x ≤ 5 44 40.3
10.75
Tradition 88 80.01 Proper 37 33.7
5< x ≤ 10 26 23.7 Taste 21 19.09 Occupied 24 21.7
10< x ≤ 15 16 14.4 Test/Pleasure 1 0.90 Ceded 22 20.4
15< x ≤ 20 12 10.9
Heritage 19 17.1
20< x ≤ 25 3 2.58
Usufruct 8 7.1
25< x ≤ 30 7 6.3
30< x ≤ 35 1 0.91
35< x ≤ 40 1 0.91
Total 110 100
110 100 - 110 100
Source: Field Survey, 2018.
Table 4. Equipments usage in rice production.
Category
No
Yes
% age
Hoe 0 110 100.0
Rake 97 13 11.8
Machetes 55 55 50.0
Sickle 78 32 29.1
Knife 32 78 70.9
Tractor 61 49 44.5
Animal traction 107 3 2.7
Source: Field Survey, 2018.
(3) uses animal traction as shown in (Table 4). Work from
land preparation to processing, relies mainly on the
family's workforce. The lack of capital to finance the
processing of rice prevents farmers to embrace rice
production. Instead they pay more attention to the
production of beans, corn and vegetables, since these
crops provide the income to supply the needs of their
families. The type of instruments and equipment,
presented above, is an important indicator to measure
the level of technological development of the agricultural
producers surveyed. For now, the hoe, the machete and
the knife are, so to speak, the visible face of the
technology used the producers under study. It is still a
rudimentary technology, although the use of mechanical
traction is the only element that introduces a
technological differentiation between cultivation practices.
Soil preparation, sowing and harvesting methods and
time of crops
The research showed that the population of the sample
was very heterogeneous in relation to the soil
preparation. Since the production system is rain fed,
usually the soil preparation is done three months before
sowing, beginning in July or August. In most cases, soil
preparation begins with clearing the soil, joining and
burning the grass, harnessing and spreading the ash
over the ground. Figures in (Table 5) show that 70% of
farmers prepare the soil in August 85 (77.2%) do the
sowing in November and 69 (62.2%) harvest in June.
While 30% prepare the soil in July, sow in October and
harvest in May. It is clear, from the survey that the land
preparation practices adopted by farmers depend on their
financial situation, plot size, soil nature and previous
crop.
Besides, tractor is unable to reach in the corner of the
small plots so that farmers used spade for manually
pulverize which increase labor cost. When farmers use
tractors for tillage, usually two passes are given by tractor
for pulverizing the soil. Farmers mentioned that two
passes by tractor is adequate for making a good soil bed.
The high rental charge of tractor represents an effective
restriction for its adoption by many farmers. Results also
show that in all the sampled population in the studying
area the rice is sowed directly at the definitive location,
and the transplant method is not used, because it is
rather laborious and does not compensate. Thus,
approximately 56% of the farmers in the sampled area do
direct sowing broadcasting and 44% do the direct sowing
in line as shown in (Table 6). Table 6 also shows the land
preparation and planting method used by rice farmers in
the study area.
Rice varieties under cultivation
Table 7 illustrates the adoption rates for major rice
varieties in the 11 villages. Carolino and Kessongo were
the major cultivars adopted by respectively about 53.6%
and 23.6% of the farmers. Cahilahila and Silewa were
adopted by respectively about 14.5% and 8.1% of the
farmers. The main motivations for adoption of different
Official Publication of Direct Research Journal of Agriculture and Food Science: Vol.7 (9), September 2019, ISSN 2354-4147
Chiambo et al. 255
Table 5. Soil preparation, sowing and harvest month.
Soil preparation month
Freq
%
Sowing month
Freq
%
Harvest month
Freq
%
July 34 30 October 25 22.7 May 41 37.2
August 76 70 November 85 77.2 June 69 62.7
Source: Field Survey, 2018.
Table 6. Methods of land preparation and planting rice.
System of propagation
Land preparation
Planting method
Transplanting
(%)
Direct Seed
on line (%)
Direct Seed
broadcasting (%)
Manual
(%)
Mechanical
(%)
Manual
(%)
Mechanical
(%)
0 44.0 56.0 55.5 44.5 100 0
Source: Field Survey, 2018.
Table 7. Seed varieties, sources and selection criteria.
Seed varieties
Seed sources
Selection criteria
Varieties
Freq
%
Sources
Freq
%
Criteria
Freq
%
Kessongo 26 23.6 self-produced,
local market or
neighboring
farmers
90 82.0
Yield 34 30.9
Carolino 59 53.6 Regularity 9 8.1
Cahilahila 16 14.5 official
Agriculture
Department
20 28.0
Flavor 40 36.3
Silewa 9 8.1 Resistance 27 24.5
Total 110 100 - 110 100 - 110 100
Source: Field Survey, 2018.
varieties included, higher grain and straw yield, yield
regularity, organoleptic properties and higher resistance
to lodging and diseases. Good quality seed is the main
key component of crop production. Out of the 110
farmers interviewed, 82% acquire self-produced seeds, in
the local market or neighboring farmers; the other 28%
(20) get it from the official Agriculture Department. Baloch
et al. (2004), doing a similar study, also founded that
there was high dependence on self-produced seeds
which were not cleaned, stored and processed according
to standard procedures. The seed rate was found to be
uniform (80 kg.ha-1) and higher than that for official
Agriculture Department recommendation (65 kg.ha-1). It
may be because of farmers have lack of knowledge on
seed rates and germination rates of household seed is
low.
Pest, diseases and weed control
The enemies of the crop are related to the presence of
weeds, pests and diseases. Weed flora varies from place
depending on the type of soil and the cultural practices.
Weeds are the most important biological constraint
because they emerge simultaneously with rice seedlings.
Weed control is not made by 54.5% of farmers in
Camacupa municipality this is due to the method of rice
seeding in the field (direct broadcasting). For those who
make manual weed control, 39% of farmers perform only
one intervention and 6.3% only two (Table 8); the
average number of controls was bigger in the municipality
of Catabola. All farmers in the sample reported that the
most frequent diseases affecting rice are Brown rot
sheath (Pseudomonas fuscovaginae) and Brown spot
(Cochliobolus myabeanus). The most frequent pests are
rice grasshopper, rice beetle, “saliva animal”, birds,
hippopotamus and rabbits. The control of pests and
diseases is similar to that of weeds; only 45,5% of the
farmers control rabbits attacks through the use of traps.
Farmers do not make any control for the rest of the
plagues.
Fertilizers usage, origin and transportation
Availability and application of organic fertilizer has been
decreasing overtime due to the reduction of the cattle
number per household in the villages. Therefore, today,
farmers are fully dependent on chemical fertilizer for
cropping, and the rate of application of the fertilizer has
been increasing. Farmers apply fertilizers into two
different top dresses. First top dress includes 12-24-12
(NPK), and second top dress included ammonium sulfate
(NH4SO2). Just a small number of all farmers interviewed
were aware of and applied the recommended dose of
Official Publication of Direct Research Journal of Agriculture and Food Science: Vol.7 (9), September 2019, ISSN 2354-4147
Direct Res. J. Agric. Food Sci. 256
Table 8. Crop Control and number of controls.
Culture control enemy
Number of controls
Category
Freq
%
Category
Freq
%
No control 60 54.5 0 60 54.5
Manual 50 45.5 1 43 39.0
Chemical 0 0.0 2 7 6.3
Total 110 110 - 110 100
Source: Field Survey, 2018.
Table 9. Fertilizer rate application.
Rate (kg ha-1)
Sulfate Ammonium
Freq
%
Freq
%
0.00 60 54.55 61 55.45
0< x ≤ 50 1 0.91 1 0.91
50< x ≤ 100 7 6.36 12 10.91
100< x ≤ 150 3 2.73 23 20.91
150< x ≤ 200 27 24.55 10 9.09
200< x ≤ 250 7 6.36 2 1.82
250< x ≤ 300 1 0.91 0 0.00
300< x ≤ 350 4 3.64 1 0.91
Total 110 100.00 110 100.00
Source: Field Survey, 2018.
Table 10. Source and means of transportation of the fertilizer.
Source of the fertilizer
Freq %
Means of
transportation
Freq %
Formal/Informal
Markets 18 16.36 Car 35 31.82
Official Services 32 29.09 Hand 5 3.64
None 60 54.55 Hand car 2 1.82
Motor taxi 8 7.27
Missing 60 54.55
fertilizers. However, the dose of fertilizers varied from 0-
350 kg.ha-1 in case of 12-24-12 (NPK), and the same
amount in case of ammonium sulfate. About 55% of them
did not use apply any type of fertilizer and 45% used
between 50 and 317 kg ha-1 of dose 12-24-12 (NPK),
and ammonium sulfate (NH4SO2) (Table 9). On average,
farmers applied 84 kg.ha-1 of 12-24-12 and 60 kg.ha-1 of
ammonium sulfate. Research has shown that fertilizers
are purchased in the formal or informal markets or in the
services of the Department of Agriculture (Table 10).
From the farmers acquiring fertilizers 16% bought it in the
formal/informal markets and 29% in the Department of
Agriculture. From purchase to destination, the fertilizer
was transported by car (31.8%), hand (3.6%), hand car
(1.82%), motor taxi (7.27%) or unknown means
(54.55%).
Harvesting and threshing
Rice in Catabola and Camacupa is mainly harvested and
threshed manually. Harvesting is done in May and June
when the whole plant has a yellow color and 5 to 10
percent of grains are dry, upon a tooth test to determine
the moisture content. Another important determinant
factor for the time harvest is the frequent presence of
birds on the panicle and the panicle inclination. About
58% of harvest and 93% of threshing is made by M/W1,
followed by 38% of the harvest made by M/W/C2 and 4 %
of threshing made by M/C3 (Table 11). In harvesting
1 M/W-men and women
2 M/W/C-men, woman and child
3 M/C-men and child
Official Publication of Direct Research Journal of Agriculture and Food Science: Vol.7 (9), September 2019, ISSN 2354-4147
Chiambo et al. 257
Table 11. Harvest and threshing acts.
Category
Harvest act
Threshing
act
Freq
%
Freq
%
M/W 64 58.18 102 92.73
M/C 4 3.64 4 3.64
M/W/C 42 38.10 3 2.73
W 0,00 1 0.91
Source: Field Survey, 2018.
Table 12. Processing and storage acts.
Category
Processing act
Category
Storage act
Freq
%
Freq
%
M/W 92 83.64 bags 93 84.55
M/C 2 1.82 bottle 11 10.00
M/W/C 5 4.55 Mat container 6 5.45
W 11 10.00
Source: Field Survey, 2018.
activity about 70.9% use knives and 29.1% use sickle
(Table 4). Male and female farmers then carry harvested
paddy to a threshing floor that was previously prepared
by removing weeds, sand and other debris. The threshing
is done slowly to avoid breaking the rice grains using
traditional harvesters. Then using a special wood stick,
seed are separated from straw in a very labor and time-
consuming process. On average to thresh 1 hectare of
paddy field requires 13–15 person-days of about 12 h.
With this method the seed breakages and the
contamination with sand is high. According to Weerakoon
et al. (2011) this method of threshing is now seldom
practiced and trampling rice using a 4-wheel tractor or
mechanical thresher is now the common method. As the
labor requirement for harvesting and threshing is high,
mechanization is essential for a sustainable rice
production.
Processing and storage
About 86.3% of the rice produced is processed manually
using traditional mill or mortars. The remaining 13.6% of
the farmers that use the husks available in the
Department of Agriculture4,that has a small processing
capacity of 500kg.h-1. The artisanal processing results in
grains of poor quality, less attractive to the consumer,
which then prefers the imported rice. About 84% of
processing is made by M/W5, and about 85% of storage
is made in bags (Table 12).
4 There are only two processing machines located one in the
department of the agriculture of the municipality of Catabola and
another in the municipality of Camacupa.
5 M/W-men and women
Yields (paddy rice)
The paddy yield varied from 200 to 1800 kg.ha-1
depending upon the availability of resources crop
management and the socio-economic status of the
growers (Table 13). Table 13 shows 40.91% registered a
yield from 600 to 800 kg.ha-1; 21.82% registered a yield
from 800 to 1000 kg.ha-1 and only 1.82% of the famers
reached yields from 1600 to 1800 kg.ha-1. On average,
the total yield was 894.38 kg.ha-1 (with a minimum of
359.71 kg.ha-1; and a maximum of 1800,00 kg.ha-1.
Differences between the two municipalities
Table 14 gives a statistical description of the means of
several variables that allow determining the difference
between the rice producers of the two municipalities.
According to the Table 14, the significantly differences
observed between the two municipalities are:, the age of
the farmers, the level of education, the number of
households, the time devoted to agricultural work, the
productivity achieved, the application rates of fertilizers
and the number of controls of crop enemies. Catabola,
compared to Camacupa, has a younger population, a
higher average level of education, a higher household
number, slightly more years of rice cultivation experience,
higher application rates of fertilizers, more control number
of crop enemies and, consequently, a higher rice
productivity.
Productivity and correlated and explanatory main
variables
In order to establish the relationships between the
different variables and the productivity, we have explored
Official Publication of Direct Research Journal of Agriculture and Food Science: Vol.7 (9), September 2019, ISSN 2354-4147
Direct Res. J. Agric. Food Sci. 258
Table 13. Paddy yield.
Yield
kg/ha
Fr
eq
%
200< x ≤ 400 2 1.82
400< x ≤ 600 6 5.45
600< x ≤ 800 45 40.91
800< x ≤ 1000 24 21.82
1000< x ≤ 1200 18 16.36
1200< x ≤ 1400 7 6.36
1400< x ≤ 1600 6 5.45
1600< x ≤ 1800 2 1.82
Source: Field Survey, 2018.
Table 14. Catabola and Camacupa means for several socio-economic variables (*).
Municipality Age* Years of
education*
Household
number*
% of
agricultural
labor*
Rice
cultivation
experience
Productivity
(kg. ha-1)*
Application
rate of
fertilizer 12-
24-12 (kg.
ha-1)*
Number
of
controls*
Applic
ation
rate of
fertilizer
ammonium
sulfate
(kg. ha-1)*
Catabola 44.64
2.08 a 4.50 0.91 11.38 1076.21 163.71 0.90 117.36
Camacupa 52.48
1.28 b 6.85 0.97 10.23 742.85 17.48 0.20 11.38
Source: Field Survey, 2018.* variable means of the two municipalities are significantly different by F test (N=110; df: 108;
p<0,05)
the data through a correlation analysis. Table 15,
synthetizes the statistical significant correlations (positive
or negative) that we have found. From the Table 15, we
can deduce that rice productivity is positively correlated
with the level of education (i.e., the higher the level of
education, the greater the capacity for technological
perception and adoption), the tractor usage (that
accelerates fieldwork and allows to extend the fields
cultivation), the rate of application of fertilizers; the
sowing date (the later the better), the line coverage (i.e.,
involving all the family work force - M/W/C - is better), the
place of sale (in markets is better) and processing
methods (mechanized is better). On the other hand,
productivity is negatively correlated with the municipality
(Catabola is better), the village (Ndembei, Kalila and
Kalohuma, are better) and the age of the farmers (i.e. the
younger the greater workforce and higher productivity).
Finally, we have tested a step-by-step forward multiple
regression analysis to identify the variables with the
greatest explanatory power on final productivity achieved
by the producers (Table16). From Table 16 we can
conclude that the final production achieved can be
essentially explained by four variables: Number of
controls (with an explanatory power of 43%); Age of
producers (with an extra explanatory power of 2.5%),
Processing method (with an extra explanatory power of
6.5%) and sowing month (with an extra explanatory
power of 3.8%). Those four variables have a total
explanatory power of the productivity achieved by the
farmers of 55.8%.
Gender and labor questions6
Men and women have different responsibilities in rice
production systems. In the sampled area of this study, it
was observed that women constitute bulk rice farmers.
However, women have a major participation in various
specific tasks of the cultivation of rice, such as
transplanting/sowing (34 W; 69 M/W) weeding (11 W; 42
M/W), harvesting (64 M/W; 42 M/W/C), threshing (101
M/W; 1 W; 3 M/W/C) or processing (92 M/W; 11 W; 5
M/W/C). These differences in gender roles are not always
obvious, but they must be recognized if rice production is
to be increased, especially among the small-scale
farmers. From Table 17 it seems that it is the man's
specific tasks cutting trees (107) and opening the
grooves (49). In majority of cases men only help women
in tillage, weeding and ground cover, harvesting,
threshing and processing things that are traditionally the
domain of women. Sometimes they also involved
children, in several field activities namely in bird and
rabbits control. The gender roles and responsibilities,
indicate how much time different household members
devote to different tasks (and why) and shows how these
tasks change according to the season and time of the
day. The survey revealed that participation of women in
6 The categories that we have considered are: M – man; W –
woman; C – children, and the combination of those three
(M/W; M/C; W/C; M/W/C).
Official Publication of Direct Research Journal of Agriculture and Food Science: Vol.7 (9), September 2019, ISSN 2354-4147
Chiambo et al. 259
Table 15. Significant Correlations between variables and productivity
(p<0.05).
Variable
Productiv
ity
Municipality -0.529630
Village -0.329861
Age -0.279742
Years of education 0.204840
Tractor usage 0.493386
Rate of application of fertilizer 12-24-12 (kg/ha) 0.557567
Rate of application of fertilizer ammonium sulfate (kg/ha) 0,575979
Total fertilization cost (kg/ha) 0.589286
Sowing month 0.204935
Ground cover 0.305833
Place of sale 0.335937
Processing methods 0.317724
Source: Field Survey, 2018.
Figure 2. Labors and Gender usage.Source: Field Survey, 2018.
the intercultural activities (e.g., tree cutting, opening
grooves, and birds and rabbits control) is scarce.
However, Figure 2 shows that the participation of male,
female and children in farming reveals the strong
importance of the women in the crop system (Figure 2).
Women’s contributions in decision making about farming
in particular selection of crops and crops cultivars to be
grown in sowing, planting and harvesting dates as well as
in hiring and selling labor is also negligible. However,
women had equal roles as their male counterpart in
decision making on buying and selling of property and
livestock, the same occurring in the participation in
borrowing groups and deciding marriage of children.
Characterization of the farm “Arrozeira Society of
Camacupa”
The farm is located in the southeast of the Camacupa
Municipality and it is irrigated from the Kuquema River.
The farm, with a total area of 500 hectares, has a road
network system, an irrigation system, with two pumping
stations with six turbines, each turbines pumps 300 l.s-1
of water, a drainage system and irrigation ditches. The
sizes of the beds vary according to the topography of the
land. In the areas with regular geometry beds dimensions
vary from 34-38 hectares, and in irregular geometry
areas beds dimensions vary from 4-9 hectares.
Official Publication of Direct Research Journal of Agriculture and Food Science: Vol.7 (9), September 2019, ISSN 2354-4147
Direct Res. J. Agric. Food Sci. 260
Table 16. Regression Summary for Dependent Variable: Productivity (kg/ha) (Adjusted R²= 0.61;
F (5.95) =26.558; p<0; Std. Error of estimate: 199.25).
b*
Std. Err.
b
Std. Err.
T (95)
p
-
value
Intercept
-25844.487 10,449.469 -2.473 0.015
First variable to enter:
Number of controls 0.506 0.082 244.127 39.678 6.153 0.000
Second variable to enter: Age
-0.186 0.073 -5.125 2.026 -2.529 0.013
Third variable to enter:
Processing methods 0.214 0.074 180.225 61.983 2.908 0.005
Fourth variable to enter:
Sowing month 0.208 0.067 153.340 49.204 3.116 0.002
Source: Field Survey, 2018. (b*) are the standardized regression coefficients. b coefficients that are not
standardized.
Table 17. Gender and labour questions.
Category
M
W
C
M/W
M/C
W/C
M/W/C
None
Tree cutting 107
2 1
Tillage 6
93 3
8
Clearing the field 24
34 2
50
Opening the grooves 49
61
Sowing 7 34
69
Ground cover 1
9 68 11 3 18
Bird control 9
93
8
Rabbits control 7
21
32
50
Fertilization 21 9
21
59
Weeding 2 11
42
55
Harvest
64 4
42
Threshing
1
102 4
3
Processing
11
92 2
5
Source: Field Survey, 2018.
One of the fundamental aspects is the total
independence of each plot in terms of the flooding and
drainage. This is possible, given the well carried leveling
of the land.
Soil preparation at the level of business sector
The ground leveling is an aspect that deserves more
attention during the preparation of the soil, because when
it is poorly done, it hinders the drainage and the aeration
of the soil and the nutrients are easily dragged. This
operation is carried out by means of a tractor that draws
a leveling blade controlled by a system emitting laser
beam that allows to maintain the same dimension of the
ground, leaving it as uniform as possible. Regarding laser
land leveling, Meena et al., (2014) advocate that this
system allow the leveling between 0 to 0.2% slopes so
that there is uniform distribution of water, enhancing
resource use efficiency. Land laser leveling allows a 4%
rise in area under cultivation due to the removal of bunds
and channels; saves 10-15% water due to uniform
distribution; increases resource (N and water) use
efficiency; reduces cost of production and enhances
productivity. A precisely leveled field is therefore an
important prerequisite for successful direct-seeded rice
cultivation.
Ground correction
For acidity correction (pH=4.5) of the soil it is applied 1
ton ha-1 of calcium carbonate (CaCO3), adding up to 500
tons for the total cultivated area.
Fertilizing
Although the soil contains a good percentage of organic
matter which the content is in the order of 7.4%
(Gonçalves, n/d), it is necessary to balance the content of
phosphorus (P2O5) and potassium (K2O), because the
soil leveling process causes a nutrient imbalance in the
soil. Thus, 1.000 kg.ha-1 of complex fertilizer containing 7-
14-14 (N-P-K) and 3-2-9 (Ca-Mg-S) and vestigial
concentration of boron (B), is also applied. This operation
is carried out by means of a fertilizer spreader and
tractor.
Chemical weeding
In order to prevent the growth of weeds, a pre-emergent
herbicide in a concentration of 10 liters of glyphosate in
250 liters of water per hectare is applied.
Official Publication of Direct Research Journal of Agriculture and Food Science: Vol.7 (9), September 2019, ISSN 2354-4147
Chiambo et al. 261
Sowing
The type of sowing is direct, and is done mechanically.
On average, 65 kg.ha-1 are sown in rows of 20 cm apart
and at a depth of 2 to 3 cm.
Varieties
The seed variety used is type UN10 from the Chinese
company WINAll Seeds. Before sowing, it is made a
germination test. This consisted in placing 100 seeds in
water for 7 days and that resulted in a 98% efficacy of
germinated power. The UN10 has a cycle of 150 days
meaning that, if the sowing date is late this cycle is
forced, implying early maturation, and thus compromising
the yield of the crop. Thus, it is important that the sowing
date occur in the months of October to November, never
going beyond mid-January.
The flooding of beds
This process starts 3 days after sowing and uses two
turbines pumping 600 l.s-1 of water with the engine
running 24 h a day. At the same time, the irrigation
channel floodgates are opened to allow gradual flooding
of already sown plots. It usually takes 48 h of continuous
water flooding to achieve soil saturation. The expected
productivity with this technology is around 6.000 kg.ha-1.
Production destination
The rice produced is harvested with 20 to 21% moisture
content, than artificially dried to 13% moisture and, finally,
stored in the husk. Afterwards, it is peeled, bagged and
sold. Potential buyers are the armed forces, population of
different points of the country in particular of the
provinces of Bié, Huambo, Benguela and Moxico. The
company supports the Agrarian Development Institute by
distributing seeds to the peasant families with the aim of
promoting rice production in every municipality. This data
is important to mapping the market chain.
Water management
As a permanent flooding system, the farm has the
Kuquema River as a source of water. Once the cultural
cycle is finished, the extra water is drained back into the
river. When the water level in the Kuquema is high, this
drainage needs to be done with the support of the
Pumping Station. This data is important for assessing the
environmental impact of wastewater on the Kuquema
River aquatic ecosystem.
Differences and Similarities between the business
and the traditional rice sectors
Table 18 refers to the factors that make it possible to
distinguish the two production systems in terms of the
technology used. According to this data, it is noticeable
that there are great differences in terms of the
Systematization of the field, the Cultural Operations, the
Harvest, the Threshing, the Processing and the
Destination of production and in the equipment used.
However, there is the similarity that both the business
and the traditional sectors use the direct sowing method.
The difference is that while for the traditional sector, the
sowing method is manual, and in most cases, it is broad
casting, in the business sector, it is completely
mechanized. The rice value chain in the business sector
is complete whereas in the traditional sector it is very
fragmented and has no mechanized tools for processing
rice to obtain grain quality. Rice cultivation in the
traditional sector is motivated by the food family need, the
tradition, the habits and the customs of the region, while
for the business sector cultivation is motivated for
commercial purposes, which imposes the permanent
quality improving of the grain to make it increasingly
competitive in the market. All the advantages fall to the
business sector that make a big investment that
translates into the final yield and economic return of the
culture.
Table 18. Differences and similarities between the business and the traditional rice sectors,
Technical Itinerary
Business sector
Traditional sector
Systematization of
the field
Road network
Pump station
Watering ditches
Ditch ditches
In some cases
Source: The authors
Official Publication of Direct Research Journal of Agriculture and Food Science: Vol.7 (9), September 2019, ISSN 2354-4147
Direct Res. J. Agric. Food Sci. 262
Table 18. Contd.
Cultural Operations
Mechanized tillage
Ground leveling
Correction of soils
Chemical weeding
Gradation
Fertilization
Direct sowing
Opening irrigation canals
Field flooding
Application of herbicides
In some cases
only if the sowing is direct on line
Is not applied
In some cases only
In some cases only
In some cases only
Is not applied
In some case
Is not used
Harvest and
threshing Combine harvester Is usually made with knife or sickle
Drying Determination of moisture content (
Dryer) Extend on tarpaulins
Storage Silos or in bag of 5, 10, 25 and 50
kg Store in bags/bottles
Processing Mechanized
(Use of debarking machine) Handcrafted (artisanal)
Destination of
production
Farmers
Agrarian Development Institute
Armed forces
General Population
Consumption
Seed Conservation
Sale
Equipment
Heavy disc harrow
Tractor fertilizer spreader
Tractor with rotating Disc harrow
Leveler Tractor
Rotary Excavator
Seed drill
Combine harvester
Manual Instruments
Source: The authors
Conclusion
The rice production has been widely practiced during last
several decades in Camacupa and Catabola
municipalities. The farmer’s survey described in the
present study identified several short to long-term
measures to enhance the productivity and production
needed to meet the growing demand of future years. The
rural population, despite being mostly young does not
have nevertheless sufficient preparation, knowledge,
means and motivation to be able to develop an efficient
agrarian activity. This situation is aggravated by the fact
that among farmers there is still a predominance of
subsistence agriculture, with a non-commercial, non-
productive and unprofessional vision. Rice-rice-rice is the
dominant cropping patterns in the village. Farmers’
practice of rice farming is highly inconsistent with
recommendation practice in terms of time of establishing
crops, seeds and fertilizers rates and pesticides. A
typical example is the fact that farmers apply lower doses
of fertilizers due to lack of knowledge and money.
Women are intensively participating in post-harvest
processing of crops and other household activities as well
as households decision other than farming. In short, rice
production is of the great interest of farmers. However,
poor access to extension service, lack of good quality
seed, phosphorous fertilizers, pesticides and power
supply were identified as barriers to achieve better
performance of rice production and expected higher
returns. Overcoming these bottlenecks and better price
conditions may enhance better farm productivity and
profitability in rice production. Lack of control of crop
enemies, non-use of fertilizers and adequacy of sowing
date in relation to the varieties used are some of the
factors that underlie low productivity. The study
concluded that the final production achieved by each
farmer can be essentially explained by four variables:
Number of controls (with an explanatory power of 43%);
Age of producers (with an extra explanatory power of 2.
5%); Processing method (with an extra explanatory power
Official Publication of Direct Research Journal of Agriculture and Food Science: Vol.7 (9), September 2019, ISSN 2354-4147
Chiambo et al. 263
of 6.5%) and sowing month (with an extra explanatory
power of 3.8%). Those four variables have a total
explanatory power of the productivity achieved by the
farmers of 55.8%. Thus measures relating to the
expansion of field schools with a view to giving farmers
adequate knowledge of appropriate cultivation methods
and establishing a partnership especially with regard to
rice processing between business and traditional sectors
would be key to leveraging the agricultural rice sector in
the region.
Authors’ declaration
We declared that this study is an original research by our
research team and we agree to publish it in the journal.
REFERENCES
Ayanda B, Folounsho J (2019). Rice farmers preferred extension
teaching methods for capacity building in Kwara State Nigeria.
https://dx.doi.org/10.43/4/Jae.V23i2,2.retrived date.
Baloch SM, Awan UI, Hassan G, Khan MA, Ahmad K, Sulemani ZM
(2004). Quantitative assessment of social and some input variables
relating to rice production in Dera Ismail Khan, Pakistan. Journal of
Agronomy. ISSN 1680-8207.
Carriço J (2014). Sociedade arrozal de Camacupa. Verbal
Communication. Angola. Bié.
Chiambo PJ, Coelho JP, Lima A, Soares FB, Salumbo A (2019).
Angola: Rice Crop Grow and Food Security Reinforcement. Journal
of Rice Research. 7:205. doi:10.4172/2375-4338.1000205.
Corranza F, Treakle J (2014). Land, Territorial, Development and
Family Farming in Angola. A holistic approach to community- based
natural resources governance: The cases of Bié, Huambo and Huila
Provinces. FAO. Rome.
Diniz AC (1998). Angola o meio físico e potencialidades agrárias.
Cooperação Portuguesa. Lisboa.
Faust K, Christopher E (2015). Effects of Paddy Rice production on the
welfare of farmers and the determinants of the achievements of
Paddy rice farmers in Niger Delta Region of Nigeria. Journal of
Economics and Sustainable Development. 6: (4).
Gonçalves MS (n/d). Gestão de Resíduos orgânicos. Agricultura e
ambiente. Sociedade Portuguesa de Invovação. Portugal.
Ibitoye SJ, Orebiyi JS, Shaibu UM (2012). Economic Effect of Inorganic
Pesticide Use on Fadama II Rice Farming in Ibaji Local Government
Area, Kogi State, Nigeria. International Journal of Agric. and Rural
Development, SAAT, FUTO. 15 (2): 1063 – 1070.
Okeke CG, Oluka IS (2017). A survey of rice production and processing
in South east Nigeria. Nigeria Journal of Technology.
www.nijotech.com. access date: March 17, 2019.
Rao AN, Wani SP, Ramesha MS, Ladha JK (2017). Rice production
Systems. In: Chauhan B., Jabran K., Mahajan G. (eds) Rice
production Worldwide. Springer, Cham.
RGPH (2014). Resultados Definitivos do Recenseamento Geral da
População e da
Habitação de Angola. Censo 2014. Angola. In. www.ine.gov.ao e
http://censo.ine.gov.ao. Accessed in September 6, 2019.
Meena BP, Prasad D, Dotaniya ML, Meena DV (2014). Modern
techniques of rice production. A key for ecosystem sustainability in
changing climate. Indian farming. India.
Weerakoon WMW, Mutunayake PMM, Bandara C, Rao NA, Bhandari
DC, Ladha KJ (2011). Direct-seeded rice culture in Sri lanka lessons
from farmers. Field Crops Research. Journal
homepage:www.elsevier.com/located/fcr.
