sustainability
Article
Appraisal of the Sesame Production Opportunities and
Constraints, and Farmer-Preferred Varieties and Traits, in
Eastern and Southwestern Ethiopia
Desawi Hdru Teklu 1,2,* , Hussein Shimelis 1 , Abush Tesfaye 3 and Seltene Abady 4
1 African Centre for Crop Improvement, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Pietermaritzburg 3209, South Africa;
Shimelish@ukzn.ac.za
2 Ethiopian Agricultural Transformation Agency, Addis Ababa 708, Ethiopia
3 International Institute of Tropical Agriculture, Ibadan 5320, Nigeria; at.abebe@cgiar.org
4 School of Plant Sciences, Haramaya University, Dire Dawa 138, Ethiopia; seltene.abadi@haramaya.edu.et
* Correspondence: desawi.hdru@ata.gov.et
Abstract: Sesame (Sesamum indicum L.) is an important oilseed crop with well-developed value
chains. It is Ethiopia’s most valuable export commodity after coffee (Coffea arabica L.), contributing to
socioeconomic development. The productivity of the crop is low and stagnant in Ethiopia and other
major sesame growing regions in sub-Saharan Africa (<0.6 t/ha) due to a multitude of production
constraints. The objective of this study was to document sesame production opportunities and
constraints, as well as farmer- and market-preferred varieties and traits, in eastern and southwestern
Ethiopia as a guide for large-scale production and breeding. A participatory rural appraisal (PRA)



 study was conducted in two selected sesame growing regions and four districts in Ethiopia. Data


were collected from 160 and 46 sesame farmers through semistructured questionnaires and focus
Citation: Teklu, D.H.; Shimelis, H.; group discussions. Sesame is grown by all respondent farmers in the study areas for food and as a
Tesfaye, A.; Abady, S. Appraisal of the source of cash. Most respondent farmers (56%) reported cultivating sesame using seeds of unknown
Sesame Production Opportunities and varieties often sourced from the informal seed sector. About 83% of the respondents reported lack
Constraints, and Farmer-Preferred of access to improved seeds as the most important production constraint, followed by low yield
Varieties and Traits, in Eastern and
gains from cultivating the existing varieties (reported by 73.8% of respondents), diseases (69.4%),
Southwestern Ethiopia. Sustainability
13 and low market price (68.8%). Other production constraints included insect pests (59.4%), lack of2021, , 11202. https://doi.org/
10.3390/su132011202 market information (55%), and high cost of seed (50%). The above constraints were attributed to the
absence of a dedicated breeding programme, lack of a formal seed sector, poor extension services, and
Academic Editor: Teodor Rusu underdeveloped pre- and postharvest infrastructures. The most important market-preferred traits of
sesame included true-to-type seed (reported by 36.3% of respondents), white seed colour (28.8%), and
Received: 17 September 2021 high seed oil content (23.8%). The vital farmer-preferred attributes included reasonable market price
Accepted: 30 September 2021 (reported by 11.3% of respondents), resistance to crop diseases (10.9%), drought tolerance (10.3%),
Published: 11 October 2021 resistance to crop insect pests (9.2%), higher seed yield (8.9%), higher thousand-seed weight (7.2%),
higher oil content (6.3%), white seed colour (6.1%), early maturity (6.1%), and good oil qualities such
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral as aroma and taste (5.7%). Therefore, there is a need for a dedicated sesame genetic improvement
with regard to jurisdictional claims in programme by integrating the above key production constraints and market- and farmer-preferred
published maps and institutional affil-
traits to develop and deploy new generation varieties to enhance the production, productivity, and
iations.
adoption of sesame cultivars in Ethiopia.
Keywords: Ethiopia; market-preferred traits; participatory rural appraisal; production constraints;
Sesamum indicum
Copyright: © 2021 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and 1. Introduction
conditions of the Creative Commons
Sesame (Sesamum indicum L.) is an important oilseed crop valued in the food, feed, and
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ cosmetics industries. The seed oil content of sesame is the highest (60%) when compared
4.0/). to other oilseed crops such as soybean (~20%), rapeseed (~40%), sunflower (~45%), and
Sustainability 2021, 13, 11202. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132011202 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability
Sustainability 2021, 13, 11202 2 of 17
groundnut (45-56%) [1–5]. The seed oil is a rich source of protein (~24%), carbohydrate
(~13.5%), vitamins (e.g., A and E), lignans (sesamin and sesamolin), and lipids [4,6–8].
Sesame seed has essential nutritional benefits to human health, including antioxidant,
antiaging, antihypertensive, anticancer, and cholesterol-lowering properties. Further, the
sesame oil seedcake contains about 32% crude protein (CP) and 8-10% oil serving as an
essential feed for livestock and poultry [9]. The sesame biomass is used for animal feed,
soap production, compost manure, and the production of potash, a cooking ingredient
widely used in West African countries [10]. These and other benefits make sesame a highly
valued industrial crop globally [11].
Sesame is Ethiopia’s second most crucial export crop after coffee (Coffea arabica). In
2020, the area allocated for sesame production was 375,119.95 ha, 45.7% of the estimated
area under oil crop production [12]. It is an eminent crop and a significant contributor to
the gross domestic product in Ethiopia [13]. Globally, a total of 2,211,339 tons of sesame
grain was traded with a monetary value of 3.4 trillion USD in 2019 [14]. In 2019, sub-
Saharan African countries exported about 1,465,493 tons of unprocessed sesame with a
cash value of 1.9 trillion USD [14]. In 2019, Ethiopia’s sesame export share was 8.96% of
global exports, valuing 307 million USD [14]. In terms of global total sesame production,
Ethiopia ranked ninth in 2019 with an annual production of 262,654 tons, after Sudan
(1,210,000 tons), Myanmar (744,498 tons), India (689,310 tons), Tanzania (680,000 tons),
Nigeria (480,000 tons), China (469,104 tons) and China Mainland (467,000 tons) [14].
In Ethiopia, sesame is mainly produced for household food and as a source of cash. It
is predominantly grown by smallholders (95.5%) and medium-to-large commercial farmers
(0.5%) under rainfed conditions. Sesame production is primarily localized in the lowland
areas of the country, where drought and heat stresses are common episodes. According
to the Ethiopian Central Statistical Agency (CSA), during the 2019/2020 production sea-
sons, the total area and volume of sesame production under medium-to-large commercial
farming conditions was the highest in Tigray (56.42%), followed by Amhara (32.03%),
Benishangul-Gumuz (7.25%), and Oromia (3.17%), whereas the total area and volume
of production under smallholder farming systems was the highest in Amhara (51.82%),
followed by Tigray (30.88%), Oromia (9.41%), and Benishangul-Gumuz (7.34%) [15].
The productivity of sesame is low and stagnant in Ethiopia and other major sesame
growing regions in sub-Saharan Africa (<0.6 t/ha) because of many production constraints.
The low yield of sesame is attributable to a lack of high-yielding and well-adapted varieties,
susceptibility to capsule shattering, the prevalence of biotic and abiotic stresses, and a lack
of modern production technologies such as optimal agronomic managing practices, row
planters, harvesters, and storage facilities [6,10,16–19]. Furthermore, Ethiopian farmers
use landrace varieties of the crop that are inherently low yielders and prone to capsule
shattering, leading to reduced productivity and low income. However, landraces are
highly valued for having farmer-preferred attributes such as unique taste, aroma, and
adaptation to grow under low-input farming systems and marginal agricultural lands. Con-
sequently, these production constraints have yet to be systematically studied, prioritized,
and documented in Ethiopia to guide research and development of the crop.
The sesame breeding research in Ethiopia was started in the late 1960s by the Ethiopian
Agricultural Research Institute (EIAR) based at the Melka Werer Agricultural Research
Centre (WARC) [20]. From 1960 to 1979, some introduced landrace collections were used
to initiate the sesame breeding programme in the country. The local sesame breeding pro-
gramme has mainly focused on characterization and mass selection of landrace collections
for desirable traits for direct recommendation and large-scale production, marketing, and
breeding. For instance, a total of 32 improved sesame verities were developed and released
by the EIAR through mass selection from among the local germplasm collections [21]. The
sesame varieties designated as Humera-1 and Setit-1 were released by the Humera Agri-
cultural Research Centre (HuARC) in 2010. These varieties are widely grown by farmers
for their early maturity, better yield response, and broad adaptability. The yield response
of these varieties is low (<1.00 ton/ha), below the reportedly attainable yields of the crop
Sustainability 2021, 13, 11202 3 of 17
at 2.53 and 1.62 tons/ha in Israel and China, respectively [14]. Therefore, sesame breeding
programmes are required to select and identify desirable genotypes for practical breeding,
genetic analyses, gene discovery, and developing high-performing and framer-preferred
varieties. Sesame genetic improvement programmes should be guided by the prevalent
production constraints of the growers as well as farmer- and market-preferred traits. These
conditions will enable the development and deployment of new varieties according to the
needs and preferences of the value chain, including participants such as farmers, traders,
oil processors, and consumers.
Farmers are the main actors in agriculture enterprises, with a wealth of indigenous
knowledge about their crops, farming systems, and constraints, and they have the means to
adopt a technology [22]. Participatory rural appraisal (PRA) is a multidisciplinary research
approach that aims to incorporate knowledge and opinions of farmers in the planning
and management of research development projects and programmes [23]. PRA studies
have been conducted in Senegal and Mali to initiate sesame research programmes and
develop policies that optimized sesame production and improved farmers’ livelihoods [10].
Through a PRA study, Dossa et al. [10] identified a lack of marketing, a decline in soil
fertility, limited access to land, drought stress, backward agricultural implements, a lack of
extension service, and limited access to agricultural inputs as most essential constraints on
sesame production in Senegal and Mali. Myint et al. [24] reported insect pests, postharvest
loss, drought, and salinity stresses as the overriding sesame production constraints in
Myanmar. In Ethiopia, Abady et al. [25] used PRA tools. They reported drought stress,
poor soil fertility, poor supply of improved seed, preharvest diseases (e.g., root rots and
leaf spots), low-yielding varieties, poor access to extension services, poor access to credit,
and limited availability of improved varieties as key challenges for groundnut production.
Additionally, in Ethiopia, Sori [26] reported limited access to credit and scarcity of
land as affecting the magnitude of groundnut supply to the marketplace. In Ethiopia,
no recent study has documented farmers’ perceptions of the production constraints on
sesame and the preferred traits that farmers, market, and the value chain require in a new
sesame variety. Therefore, the objective of this study was to document sesame production
opportunities and constraints and farmer- and market-preferred varieties and traits in
eastern and southwestern Ethiopia as a guide for large-scale production and breeding.
Consequently, this will serve as market research to guide variety design and development
and to develop a successful marketing strategy.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Description of the Study Areas
The study was conducted in 2021 in two regions in Ethiopia: the Oromia region, in the
Babile and Gursum districts in eastern Ethiopia, and in the Southern Nations, Nationalities,
and Peoples’ (SNNP) region in Melekoza and Basketo districts. The study areas are among
Ethiopia’s major sesame growing belts (Table 1 and Figure 1). Babile and Gursum have
a predominantly well-drained sandy loam soil that is ideal for sesame production. The
rainfall distribution of the areas is bimodal, with the main rain (locally referred to as Meher
rain) received during July to October and short rain (locally known as Belg rain) during
March to May [27]. The mean annual maximum and minimum temperatures are 28.1 ◦C
and 15.5 ◦C, respectively, with the total annual rainfall ranging from 507 to 984 mm in the
Babile district. The Gursum district receives an annual rainfall between 600 and 900 mm,
with average temperatures varying between 25 and 33.5 ◦C. The predominant soil types
of the Melekoza and Basketo districts are sandy soil with clay textures, ideal for sesame
production. The rainfall distribution of the areas is bimodal, with the main rain received
during July to October and short rain during March to May. The annual average rainfall
is 750–1500 mm and 1000–1400 mm in the Melekoza and Basketo districts, respectively,
during the primary cropping season (June to August) [28]. During the study, the minimum
and maximum temperatures in Melekoza district were 15.1 to 27.5 ◦C, while those in
Basketo were 15 and 27 ◦C, respectively [28].
Sustainability 2021, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 18 
 
rainfall is 750–1500 mm and 1000–1400 mm in the Melekoza and Basketo districts, respec-
tively, during the primary cropping season (June to August) [28]. During the study, the 
minimum and maximum temperatures in Melekoza district were 15.1 to 27.5 °C, while 
those in Basketo were 15 and 27 °C, respectively [28].  
Table 1. Agroclimatic and soil characteristics of the study areas. 
Altitude Annual 
Region District Villages  
(Meter 
above Geographic  Rain-
Tempera-
Sustainability 2021, 13, 11202
 Coordinates fall ture  Soil T
4ypofe1 7
Sea 
Level) (mm) 
(°C) 
Eibada Ge-
OTraobmleia1 . BAagbriolec limaticmaencdhusoil characteristic
9s°o1f3′t0h9e″ sN 1642 tu
, d4y2°a1r9e′a2s5.″ 507–984 15.5–28.1 Sandy loam 
E 
 ARlatimtuadtea Salama 
Region District Villag es Gursum(M eter a
Abboavde ir Geographic 9°14′60A.n0n0″u aNl  Temperature◦ SCohirloTmypiec ver-
Sea Lev Coo1r6d4i8n ates Rainfall (mm) 600–9(0C0 ) 25–33.5 Oeld) a 42°14′60.00” E tisol 
Eibada Gemechu Salaysh Mender 9◦ ′Babile 1642 13 09
′′ N,
◦ ′ ′′ 507–984 15.5–28.1 Sandy loamRamata Salama
Oromia Mele- 01   42 19 25 E 6°29′59.99″ N, 750–Abadir 9◦141′3609.50 0′′ N, 15.1–27.5 Sandy loam Gursum Oda koza Sa1l6a4y8sh Mender ◦ ′ ′′ 36°39′5690.09–9″0 0E 152050– 33.5 Chromic vertisolSNNP 42 14 60.00 E
Salaysh Mender 01 03 ◦ ′ ′′
Melekoza 6 29 59.99 N, Sandy loamSalaysh Mender 03 13
SNNP A
95ngela 03 ◦ ′ ′′ 6°15′07.5036 39 59.99 E 00–″1 5N00, 10150.–1–27.5
Angela 03 Basketo ◦ 1′600 ′′ 15–27 Sandy loam 
Basketo 16A00ngela 04 6 15 0.00 4 N, 36°34′Angela 04 ◦ ′ ′′ 15090.–9194″0 E0  140105 –27 Sandy loam36 34 59.99 E
SNNP, Southern Nations, Nationalities, and Peoples’. 
SNNP, Southern Nations, Nationalities, and Peoples’.
 
Figure 1. Map of Ethiopia showing the study sites shown with red squares: (a) SNNP districts (Melekoza and Basketo);
(Fbi)guOrreo m1. iMa adpis torfi cEtsth(iGopuiras ushmowanindg Bthabe isletu).dyC SsiAte,sC sehnotwranl wStiatthis rteicda lsqAugaernesc:y (;aS) NSNNNPSP, dSiosutrtihcetsr n(MNealetikoonzsa,  Nanadti oBnasaklietiteos),; 
(b) Oromia districts (Gursum and Babile). CSA, Central Statistical Agency; SNNPS, Southern Nations, Nationalities, and 
aPnedopPleeos’p. les’.
2.2. Questionnaire Design and Sampling Procedures
A semistructured questionnaire and focused group discussions (FGDs) were used to
collect data in the study areas. Data collected from FGDs were used to support and validate
the information obtained from the semistructured questionnaire. A purposive sampling
procedure was employed to select two sesame-growing regions, i.e., Oromia and SNNP,
in Ethiopia. Figure 2 presents the sampling method, showing the selected regions, zones,
districts, and villages for the study. From the Oromia region, two districts were selected
from the east Hararghe zone (Babile and Gursum districts). In each district, two villages,
locally referred to as ‘kebeles’, were subsampled, i.e., Eibada Gemechu and Ramata Salama
in the Babile district and Abadir and Oda Oromia in the Gursum district. From the SNNP
region, two districts were selected (Melokoza district from Gofa zone and Basketo district).
Sustainability 2021, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 18 
 
2.2. Questionnaire Design and Sampling Procedures  
A semistructured questionnaire and focused group discussions (FGDs) were used to 
collect data in the study areas. Data collected from FGDs were used to support and vali-
date the information obtained from the semistructured questionnaire. A purposive sam-
pling procedure was employed to select two sesame-growing regions, i.e., Oromia and 
SNNP, in Ethiopia. Figure 2 presents the sampling method, showing the selected re-
gions, zones, districts, and villages for the study. From the Oromia region, two districts 
were selected from the east Hararghe zone (Babile and Gursum districts). In each district, 
Sustainability 2021, 13, 11202 two villages, locally referred to as ‘kebeles’, were subsampled, i.e., Eibada Gemechu a5nodf 1 7
Ramata Salama in the Babile district and Abadir and Oda Oromia in the Gursum district. 
From the SNNP region, two districts were selected (Melokoza district from Gofa zone and 
Basketo district). The Basketo district is a special district that is locally referred to as ‘spe-
ThceiaBl wasekreetdoad’,i astnrdic itti ds oaessp neocti ahladvies tar izcot nthaal tcliasslsoicfiaclalytiornef. eIrnr edactho daiss‘tsripcet,c itawlow veirleladgae’s, ,a in.ed., it
doSeaslanyosht  hMaevnedaerz o0n1 alncdl aSsasliafiycsaht iMone.nIdnere a0c3h (Mdieslterkicotz,at wdiostvriicllta) gaensd, iA.en.,gSealal a0y3s ahnMd Aenndgerla0 1
an0d4 S(BalaasyksehtoM deinstdriecrt)0, 3w(Meree lseekloezctaed is(Ttraicbtl)e a1n)d. A nragnedlao0m3 saanmdpAlinngge lma e0t4ho(Bda swkaest oudseisdt rtioct ),
wseerleecste lfeacrtmeder(sT afbrolem1 )e.aAchr avnildlaogme sfaomr ipnltienrgvimewetsh. oFdarwmaesrus swederteo sseelleeccttefda rimrreesrpsefcrotimve eoafc h
viwllaegaelthfo srtaintutes ravniedw asg.eF garromuper. s were selected irrespective of wealth status and age group.
 
Fiigurre 2.. Samplliing metthod ccassccadiing tthee sseelleecctteedd rreeggiioonnss,,z zoonneess,,d disisttrricictsts, ,a annddv vilillalaggeessf oforrt hthees tsutuddy.y. 
ThTehef aframrmeresrsw weerrees seelelecctteedd wiitth tthe assistance off tthee aaggrricicuultluturaral leexxtetnensisoino nofofifcfiecse osfo f
thtehed idsitsrtircitcstsa nanddv vilillalaggeess. .B Baasseed on tthe degree of homogeenneeiittyy oof fththee ppooppuulaltaitoino,n s,esseasmame e
prpordoudcutcitoinon, ,a nanddt itmimeea annddr reessoouurrccee availability, 20 househoollddss ffrroomm eevveeryry eiegighht tvivlliallgaegse s
wwererer arannddoommlyly sampled,, pprroovvididiningg a atotaolt aolf 1o6f01 r6e0sproenspdoentds,e onft sw, hoifchw ohnilcyh 1o4 n(9ly%)1 w4 e(9re% )
were women-headed households (Table 2). FGDs were used to support and validate the
interview data obtained from the semistructured questionnaire. The data collected from
the FGDs included information on improved varieties, seed sources, seed and grain price,
market information and challenges, and production constraints. The FGDs were held in
four groups in six villages with 7 to 10 farmers per group across the four districts, except
for Eibada Gemechu and Angela 03 villages in Babile and Basketo districts, respectively
(Figure 3).
Sustainability 2021, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 18 
 
women-headed households (Table 2). FGDs were used to support and validate the inter-
view data obtained from the semistructured questionnaire. The data collected from the 
FGDs included information on improved varieties, seed sources, seed and grain price, 
market information and challenges, and production constraints. The FGDs were held in 
four groups in six villages with 7 to 10 farmers per group across the four districts, except 
for Eibada Gemechu and Angela 03 villages in Babile and Basketo districts, respectively 
(Figure 3).  
Table 2. Social and demographic information of respondent farmers in the study areas (%; n = 160). 
Districts Chi-
Variable Class  %Mean  * df 
Babile  Basketo Gursum Melokoza Square  
p-Value 
Sustainability 2021, 13, 11202Female 7.5 17.5 2.5 7.5 9.00 6 of 17
Gender 3 5.949 0.114 
Male 92.5 82.5 97.5 92.5 91.00 
2–5 25.0 22.5 25.0 22.5 23.75 
Family sizTea ble 2. S6o–c1ia0l and dem6o7g.5ra phic in7f0o.r0m ation of7r2e.5sp ondent f7a0r.m0 ers in the70st.0u0d y areas6 (%; n =1.136707) . 0.967 
11–15 7.5 7.5 2.5 7.5 6.25 
Variable 18C–l2a9s s 17.5 20.0 2
D7i.5st ricts 12.5 19.3%8M ean * df Chi- p-Value
Age (years) 30–50 72.5 Ba7b5il.e0 Bask6e2to.5 Gursum80.0M elokoza 72.50 6 4.16S2q uare 0.655 
52F–em65a le 7Gender 10.0 5.5.0 17.150.0 2.5 7.5 7.5 8.13 9.00 3 5.949 0.114
IlliteMraaltee  42.5 932.75.5 82.257.5 97.5 12.5 92.5 30.009 1.00
Read2 a–5nd 25.0 22.5 25.0 22.5 23.75
Family size 6–10 20.0 617.55.0 70.200.0 72.5 10.0 70.0 16.257 0.00 6 1.377 0.967
w1r1it–e1 5 7.5 7.5 2.5 7.5 6.25
Prim18a–2r9y 17.5 20.0 27.5 12.5 19.38
Age (yEedarus)cation school3 (0G–5r0ade 35.0 742.25.5 75.500.0 62.5 67.5 80.0 48.757 2.50 6 4.162 0
level 2 t5o2 –86)5 10.0 5.0 10.0 7.5 8.13 12 20.319 0.06
.615 5
SecIollnitderaartye  42.5 37.5 27.5 12.5 30.00
schRoeaodl a(nGdrawdriete 2.5 202.0.5 15.02.5 20.0 10.0 16.25Education Primary school (Grade 2 to 8) 35.0 42.5 50.0 10.0 67.5 4.384 8.75 12 20.319 0.061level Secondary9s cthoo 1o2l ()G rade 9 to 12) 2.5 2.5 2.5 10.0 4.38
CoClolellgegee 0.0 02.0.5 2.50.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.63 0.63
**d df,fd, degergereeseosf ofrfe ferdeoemdo. m. 
 
FiguFriegu3.reS a3m. Spalminpglisntgru scttruurcetufroer ftohre tfhoec ufosceudsegdro gurpoudpis dcuisscsuiosnsison(FsG (FDGs)Disn) sintu sdtuyddyi sdtrisictrtisc.tsV. iVllailglaegseasr aerde edneonmominiantaedtedas 
folloaws sf:oAllo, wEisb:a Ad,a EGibeamdeac hGue;mBe, cRhaum; aBt,a RSaamlaamtaa ;SCa,laAmbaa;d Cir,; ADb, aOddira;; DE,, SOadlaay; sEh, MSaelanydsehr 0M1;eFn,dSearl a0y1s; hF,M Seanladyesrh0 M3;eGn,dAenr g0e3l;a 
03; aGn,d AAnnggeelala 0034; .and Angela 04. 
2.32..3D. aDtatCa oClloelcleticotnion  
Both primary and secondary data were collected. Primary data were collected through
interviews using a semistructured questionnaire and focus group discussions. The re-
sponses of the selected farmers were based on their 2020 sesame farming experience.
Enumerators were well-trained, and the questionnaires were pretested to ensure that
enumerators understood the subject area, to create a clear awareness among the inter-
viewees, and to improve the clarity of questions for proper data collection. Data were
collected through the semistructured questionnaire on demographic characteristics of the
households, farm sizes, the farming systems used, the sesame area cultivated and the
productivity status thereof, seed systems, production constraints, important crop traits
preferred by farmers, and market accessibility. Secondary data, such as area coverage,
production, and productivity of the crop, were collected from the respective districts of
agricultural offices used in the study.
2.4. Data Analysis
Both quantitative and qualitative data were coded and subjected to analysis using
the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) software version 20 [29]. The quan-
Sustainability 2021, 13, 11202 7 of 17
titative data were coded before analysis. Descriptive statistics, such as frequencies and
percentages, were calculated. In addition, chi-square and t-tests were performed using the
cross-tabulation procedure of SPSS.
3. Results
3.1. Sociodemographic Description of Respondent Farmers
One hundred sixty smallholder farmers were interviewed individually using semistruc-
tured questionnaires; of these, 46 participated in focus group discussions. Table 2 shows
the demographic characteristics of the participants. Of the 160 smallholder farmers inter-
viewed, 91% and 9% were males and females, respectively. Gursum district had a relatively
higher number of male respondents (97.5%), followed by Babile and Melokoza districts
(92.5% each), while Basketo district had 82.5% male participants.
Seventy percent of the households had a family size of 6 to 10 individuals, while
24% had 2 to 5 individuals. Polygamy is a common culture in the study areas and is
linked with the high population growth rate in the rural areas. The majority (73%) of the
households were between 30 and 50 years of age, indicating that the middle-aged adult
farmers were highly engaged in sesame production in the study areas. Nineteen percent of
the participants ranged from 18 to 29 years of age, while eight percent were between 51
and 65 years of age. About 49% of the respondents had attended primary school, while
30% of the participants could not read and write. The rest of the respondents were able to
read and write (16%) or had attended secondary school (4%) and college (0.6%) (n = 160).
3.2. Main Socioeconomic Activities in the Study Districts
Off-Farm Income Sources of Farmers
Table 3 presents the off-farm income sources of the respondent farmers. The result
showed that about 4% of the respondents earned off-farm income, most frequently through
a daily labourer wage and trading, followed by carpentry, serving in churches, construction
sectors, and pensions. The majority (88%) of the households did not have off-farm income
sources except for crop production and livestock rearing.
Table 3. Off-farm income sources of participants in the study areas (%; n = 160).
Districts
Income Sources %Mean * df Chi-Square p-Value
Babile Basketo Gursum Melokoza
None 95.0 78.0 90.0 88.0 87.500
Daily labour 5.0 5.0 5.0 0.0 3.750
Trader 0.0 5.0 0.0 10.0 3.750 18 23.410 0.175
Builder 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.625
Carpenter 0.0 5.0 3.0 0.0 1.875
Church employ 0.0 5.0 0.0 3.0 1.875
Pension 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.625
* df, degrees of freedom.
3.3. Farmers’ Awareness of Sesame Varieties
About 62% of the farmers had information regarding improved sesame varieties.
Framers received information about the new varieties via development agents (34%) and
local radio programmes (25%). About 38% of participant farmers were not aware of the
improved varieties (Table 4). The following sesame varieties were known and cultivated
in the study areas: Humera-1, Abasena, Wollega, Adi, and unnamed. There was a highly
significant difference (p < 0.00; χ2 = 158.71) in the sesame varieties cultivated among
the four districts. The majority (56%) of the farmers cultivated sesame using unnamed
varieties. About 38% of respondent farmers sourced sesame seeds from neighbours through
farmer-to-farmer exchange and farm-saved seeds, while 19% of respondents sourced from
local markets and 6% from nongovernment organizations such as Self Help, the Hararghe
Catholic Secretariats (HCS), and the Catholic Relief Service (CRS) (Table 4). There were no
Sustainability 2021, 13, 11202 8 of 17
government-linked sesame seed enterprises or cooperative seed production in the study
areas. Also, there were no formal seed systems to support sesame production in the study
areas except those provided by nongovernment organizations, which provided seeds for
demonstration purposes some long years ago. In Melokoza and Basketo districts, 30% of
the respondent farmers reported using sesame variety Humera-1, acquired through farmer-
to-farmer exchange, farm saving, or the local market. During the FGDs, participants stated
that Humera-1 was their chosen variety for its white seed colour, high oil content, and
yield potential, fetching reasonable market price compared to other cultivars in the study
areas. Sixty percent of the respondent farmers reported participating in technology transfer
activities. About 38%, 14%, and 8% of farmers participated in farmer training centres
(FTC), on-farm trials, and farmers’ field days, respectively, and thereby received technical
backstopping in sesame production (Table 5). About 38% of the respondent farmers
reported that FTCs were the main sources of information and technology transfer methods.
3.4. Sesame Cropping System and Production Status
Sesame cropping systems and perceptions of production trends in the four districts are
summarized in Table 5. There was a highly significant difference (p < 0.00; χ2 = 108.542) in
sesame cropping systems among the four districts. Sixty percent of the farmers cultivated
sesame as a sole crop, while 40% intercropped sesame with sorghum (37.5%), groundnut
(8.75%), or maize (3.75%) (n = 160) (Figure 4). Most of the respondent farmers (41.88%) in the
study areas practiced crop rotation of sesame with maize, followed by mung bean (18.75%),
haricot bean (17.50%), and groundnut (9.38%). Crops and their areas of production in the
study areas are summarized in Figure 5. Sesame had the most significant area coverage,
followed by maize and sorghum (Figure 5). During the FGDs, the majority (46%) of the
households reported the trend that sesame production areas had decreased, while 34%
and 19% reported increasing and constant trends, respectively, for the last five years. The
decreased area of sesame production was mainly attributed to a lack of improved varieties,
abiotic and biotic stresses, and a lack of extension services and market linkage.
Table 4. Farmers’ awareness about improved sesame varieties, seed sources, and participation in technology transfer
activities in the study areas (%; n = 160).
Districts
Variable Category %Mean * df Chi- p-Value
Babile Basketo Gursum Melokoza Square
Local market 22.5 10.0 40.0 2.5 18.75
NGOs 12.5 12.5 0.0 0.0 6.25
Seed source Farmer to farmer 50.0 2.5 57.5 40.0 37.50 9 84.000 0.000
Farm saved 15.0 75.0 2.5 57.5 37.50
Information about Yes 25.0 80.0 45.0 97.5 61.88
improved varieties No 75.0 20.0 55.0 2.5 38.13 3 54.976 0.000
No 75.0 20.0 55.0 2.5 38.13
Local radio programme 20.0 17.5 37.5 25.0 25.00
Source of information Developmental agent 0.0 62.5 0.0 72.5 33.75 9 97.809 0.000
Farmer to farmer 5.0 0.0 7.5 0.0 3.13
Unnamed 100.0 57.5 65.0 2.5 56.25
Humera-1 0.0 35.0 0.0 85.0 30.00
Varieties grown Abasena 0.0 5.0 0.0 0.0 1.25 12 158.711 0.00
Wollega 0.0 2.5 0.0 12.5 3.75
Adi 0.0 0.0 35.0 0.0 8.75
Participation in Yes 35.0 80.0 35.0 90.0 60.00
technology transfer No 65.0 20.0 65.0 10.0 40.00 3 42.500 0.000
No 65.0 20.0 65.0 10.0 40.00
Methods of On-farm trials 20.0 7.5 22.5 7.5 14.38
technology transfer Field days 2.5.0 10.0 2.5 15.0 7.50 9 67.323 0.000
FTC 12.5 62.5 10.0 67.5 38.13
NGOs, nongovernment organizations; df, degrees of freedom, FTC, farmer training centre.
Sustainability 2021, 13, 11202 9 of 17
Table 5. Farmers’ sesame cropping systems and perceptions of production trends in the study areas (%; n = 160).
Districts
Variable Category %Mean * df Chi-Square p-Value
Babile Basketo Gursum Melokoza
Cropping system Sole cropping 12.5 100.0 27.5 100.0 60.00
Inter cropping 87.5 0.0 72.5 0.0 40.00 3 108.542 0.000
Sorghum 80.0 0.0 28.0 0.0 37.50
Sesame intercropping with Groundnut 12.5 0.0 9.0 0.0 8.75Maize 7.5 0.0 3.0 0.0 3.75 9 162.819 0.000
NA 0.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 50.00
Maize 17.5 42.5 40.0 67.5 41.88
Mung bean 0.0 45.0 0.0 30.0 18.75
Sesame rotation with Haricot bean 25.0 10.0 35.0 0.0 17.50 12 98.490 0.000
Groundnut 25.0 0.0 12.5 0.0 9.38
None 32.5 2.5 12.5 2.5 12.50
SusStaeisnaambeilpitryo d2u0c2t1io, n13st, axtu FsOR PEER RECVonIEstWan t 17.5 25.0 22.5 9.0 19.38
 in the last 5 years Increasing 17.5 47.5 60.0 24 34.38 6 40.809
100 .o00f 018 
Decreasing 65.0 27.5 17.5 7.0 46.25
* df, degrees of freedom; NA, not applicable.
 
Figure 4. (A)—a sole crop of sesame; (B)—sesame intercropped with sorghum in Babile district; (C)—white seeded sesame
Fpigreufreer r4e.d (Am)—ainal ysobley cfraorpm oefr sse(psahmoteo; s(Bb)y—DseessaawmieH in.)t.ercropped with sorghum in Babile district; (C)—white seeded sesame 
preferred mainly by farmers (photos by Desawi H.). 
3.5. Constraints to Sesame Production in Ethiopia
Farmers identified the major abiotic, biotic, and market constraints affecting sesame
production in the study areas (Table 6). There was a highly significant difference (p < 0.00;
χ2 = 30.204) among districts’ access to improved seeds. Farmers’ perceptions in regard
to the assessed production constraints were further explored through FGDs. About 83%
of households reported that lack of access to improved seeds was ranked as a leading
constraint of sesame production. This was mainly attributed to the lack of government-
linked sesame seed enterprises and cooperative seed production in the study areas. About
87.5 to 90% of the households reported low yield gains by the existing varieties as the
second most crucial yield-limiting factor in the study areas.
 
Figure 5. Mean cultivated area (ha) allocated for different crops grown in the study districts in the 
2020/2021 cropping season. 
Table 5. Farmers’ sesame cropping systems and perceptions of production trends in the study areas 
(%; n = 160). 
Districts 
Variable Category  Chi-
Babile Basketo Gur- Melok-
%Mean * df p-Value 
Square 
sum oza 
Cropping sys- Sole crop-
12.5 100.0 27.5 100.0 60.00 3 108.542 0.000 
tem ping 
Sustainability 2021, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 18 
 
 
Figure 4. (A)—a sole crop of sesame; (B)—sesame intercropped with sorghum in Babile district; (C)—white seeded sesame 
Sustapinreabfielritrye2d0 2m1,a1in3,ly11 b2y02 farmers (photos by Desawi H.). 10 of 17
 
Figure 5. Mean cultivated area (ha) allocated for different crops grown in the study districts in the
Figure 5. Mean cultivated area (ha) allocated for different crops grown in the study districts in the 
2022002/02/022012 c1rocproppinpgin sgeasesoasno. n.
Table 6. Percentage of farmers and reported sesame production constraints in the study areas.
Table 5. Farmers’ sesame cropping systems and perceptions of production trends in the study areas 
(%; n = 160). Districts
Traits Rank %Mean * df Chi-Square p-Value
Babile Basketo Gursum Melekoza
Districts 
1st 95.0 75.0 97.5 62.5 82.50
Lack of access to 2nd Vari0a.0ble C1a2t.e5gory  2.5 27.5Gur- M1e0l.6o0k- %Mean * df 
Chi-
p-Value 
improved seed 3rd 2.5 0.0 Bab0.0ile Basketo2 .5 1.30 9 S30q.2u0a4re 0.000
4th 2.5 12.5 0.0 7.5 sum o5.z6a0 
1st Cropp6i5n.0g sys- So3l7e.5 crop- 1820..50 100.0 17.527.5 15000.0.00 60.00 3 108.542 0.000 
High cost of seed 2nd te7m.5  2p0.i0ng 12.5 25.0 16.253rd 25.0 10.0 0.0 30.0 16.25 9 52.019 0.000
4th 2.5 32.5 7.5 27.5 17.50
1st 37.5 50.0 55.0 25.0 41.88
Low-quality seed 2nd 7.5 20.0 10.0 45.0 20.633rd 30.0 0.0 20.0 15.0 16.25 9 36.955 0.000
4th 25.0 30.0 15.0 15.0 21.25
1st 90.0 70.0 87.5 47.5 73.75
Low yield 2nd 2.5 12.5 5.0 30.0 12.53rd 5.0 2.5 2.5 15.0 6.25 9 32.538 0.000
4th 2.5 15.0 5.0 7.5 7.5.0
1st 52.5 32.5 42.5 32.5 40.00
Climate change 2nd 12.5 45.0 20.0 30.0 26.88
(Drought) 3rd 25.0 10.0 17.5 25.0 19.38 9 16.394 0.059
4th 10.0 12.5 20.0 12.5 13.75
1st 57.5 80.0 52.5 47.5 59.38
Insect pests 2nd 5.0 2.5 7.5 30.0 11.25
3rd 15.0 10.0 15.0 15.0 13.75 9 28.654 0.001
4th 22.5 7.5 25.0 7.5 15.63
1st 77.5 82.5 65 52.5 69.38
2nd 0.0 7.5 12.5 30.0 12.50
Diseases 3rd 17.5 2.5 22.5 10.0 13.13 9 8.726 0.001
4th 5.0 7.5 0.0 7.5 5.00
1st 32.5 50.0 42.5 65.0 47.50
2nd 7.5 25.0 20.0 22.5 18.75
Weeds 3rd 27.5 10.0 25.0 5.0 16.88 9 25.715 0.002
4th 32.5 15.0 12.5 7.5 16.88
1st 42.5 87.5 30.0 60.0 55.00
Lack of 2nd 5.0 5.0 15.0 17.5 10.63
market information 3rd 25.0 2.5 27.5 12.5 16.88 9 37.449 0.000
4th 27.5 5.0 27.5 10.0 17.50
1st 57.5 90.0 62.5 65.0 68.75
Low market price 2nd 12.5 5.0 12.5 15.0 11.253rd 12.5 5.0 17.5 12.5 11.88 9 15.972 0.067
4th 17.5 0.0 7.5 7.5 8.13
* df, degrees of freedom
Sustainability 2021, 13, 11202 11 of 17
3.6. Market-Preferred Traits of Sesame
Farmers identified white seed colour, increased seed size, true-to-type seed, high oil
content, and increased thousand-seed weight as the most critical sesame market-preferred
traits in the study areas (Table 7). Farmers in all the districts ranked true-to-type seed as the
first market-preferred trait, followed by white seed colour and high oil content (n = 160).
During the FGDs, farmers stated that the middlemen and district trade offices mysteriously
engaged in market price fixing without farmers involvement. This indicates that there are
no price regulations favouring the framer’s involvement in sesame market systems in the
study areas. Therefore, it is essential for the Ministry of Trade and Industry (MoTI) through
the Ethiopian Commodity Exchange (ECX) to strengthen sesame marketing regulations
and to avail farmers of market information.
Table 7. Percentages of farmers reporting sesame market-preferred traits in the study areas.
Districts
Traits Rank %Mean * df Chi-Square p-Value
Babile Basketo Gursum Melekoza
1st 27.5 37.5 17.5 32.5 28.75
2nd 15.0 5.0 10.0 17.5 11.88
White seed colour 3rd 15.0 42.5 17.5 20.0 23.75 12 25.624 0.012
4th 20..0 12.5 30.0 17.5 20.00
5th 22.5 2.5 25.0 12.5 15.63
1st 10.0 0.0 12.5 5.0 6.88
2nd 25.0 7.5 37.5 20.0 22.50
High seed size 3rd 27.5 15.0 15.0 27.5 21.25 12 29.69 0.003
4th 25.0 55.0 32.5 27.5 35.00
5th 12.5 22.5 2.5 20.0 14.38
1st 12.5 45.0 25.0 62.5 36.25
2nd 27.5 22.5 20.0 22.5 23.13
True-to-type seed 3rd 27.5 30.0 35.0 10.0 25.63 12 65.989 0.000
4th 22.5 2.5 7.5 5.0 9.38
5th 10.0 0.0 12.5 0.0 5.63
1st 52.5 2.5 35.0 5.0 23.75
2nd 2.5 0.0 15.0 17.5 8.75
High oil content 3rd 7.5 12.5 7.5 25.0 13.13 12 65.989 0.000
4th 25.0 27.5 27.5 30.0 27.50
5th 12.5 57.5 15.0 22.5 26.88
1st 10.0 20.0 5.0 0.0 8.75
2nd 12.5 67.5 7.5 32.5 30.00
High 1000-seed weight 3rd 37.5 5.0 30.0 37.5 27.50 12 72.709 0.00
4th 10.0 2.5 22.5 22.5 14.38
5th 30.0 5.0. 35.0 7.5 19.38
* df, degrees of freedom.
3.7. Farmer-Preferred Traits
In the present study, farmers selected sesame cultivars for production based on rea-
sonable market price, resistance to diseases, drought tolerance, resistance to insect pests,
high yield, increased 1000 seed weight, high oil content, and white seed colour, in that
order (Table 8). During the FGDs, farmers described reasonable market price, high oil
content, white seed colour, and high thousand-seed weight as market-preferred traits.
These attributes attracted premium prices for sesame farmers.
Table 8. Farmer-preferred traits (% farmers) in sesame varieties in the study areas.
Districts
Traits Mean
Babile Basketo Gursum Melekoza
Yield potential 11.45 7.04 11.24 5.89 8.91
High oil content 9.63 3.45 8.73 3.52 6.33
High oil quality (e.g., aroma and taste) 6.97 4.21 6.98 4.74 5.73
Good market price 12.64 9.82 12.82 10.00 11.32
Sustainability 2021, 13, 11202 12 of 17
Table 8. Cont.
Districts
Traits Mean
Babile Basketo Gursum Melekoza
White seed colour 5.80 5.47 6.56 6.66 6.12
High 1000-seed weight 6.56 7.66 7.03 7.61 7.22
Tall plant height 5.44 1.43 5.31 2.69 3.72
High number of capsules 2.47 5.56 2.62 5.39 4.01
High number of branches per plant 5.70 6.47 4.73 4.89 5.45
Resistance to insect pests 7.26 10.65 7.24 11.52 9.17
Resistance to disease 9.42 12.19 9.31 12.60 10.88
Drought tolerance 9.00 11.06 8.94 12.37 10.34
Early maturity 3.95 10.57 4.47 5.41 6.10
4. Discussion
4.1. Sociodemographic Description of Respondent Farmers
The participation of male (91%) farmers was higher than female (9%) farmers in sesame
production in the study areas (Table 2). The disparity indicates that male households
dominated sesame production. In agreement with this finding, Dossa et al. [10] reported
that more male than female farmers were involved in sesame production in Senegal and
Mali. Gender imbalance also occurred in the findings of Abady et al. [25] on groundnut
production in similar study areas of Ethiopia.
Most of the households had a family size of 6 to 10 individuals (Table 2). Mendola [30]
suggested that the household is a significant source of labour in smallholder farming
communities, suggesting that the larger the household size, the greater the labour force
available to operate farming activities and minimize the cost of production.
The majority of the households were between 30 and 50 years of age (Table 2). It
is believed that this active age group plays a crucial role in decision-making, improving
the local economy, adopting improved technologies, and conducting farm operations.
Previously, these demographic groups were reported in the sesame production areas in
Senegal and Mali [10].
About 49% of the respondents had attended primary school, followed by 30% who
were unable to read and write. A household’s education level has a great impact on
the management of the family’s livelihood and active participation in decision making,
adoption of technologies, and farm operations [31]. Farmers with no formal education are
unwilling to adopt improved technologies and extension services and rely on traditional
farming practices in Burkina Faso [32]. Therefore, enrolling children in the local schools is
most vital to help households adopt improved technologies, extension services, and access
to information that will improve the production and productivity of the crop, thereby
improving the livelihood of the family. Further, developmental agents or any service
providers need to use vernacular language during the implementation of technology
transfer activities. Local language would improve the level of understanding of illiterate
households towards adopting improved technologies in the study areas.
4.2. Main Socioeconomic Activities in the Study Districts
Off-Farm Income Sources of Farmers
Most of the studied households did not have off-farm income sources (Table 3).
Typically, the income sources of households in developing countries are dependent on
agriculture, as favoured by the agricultural-led industrialization policies of said countries.
Abady et al. [25] and Daudi et al. [33] reported that most of groundnut farmers’ livelihoods
were derived from agriculture in Ethiopia and Tanzania, even more so in the former.
Different sources of income for farmers can help ensure their livelihoods. Therefore, it is
essential to design and introduce projects to diversify farmer’s portfolios of income sources
in the study areas to mitigate the impacts of crop failure and livestock death due to abiotic
and biotic stresses.
Sustainability 2021, 13, 11202 13 of 17
4.3. Farmers’ Awareness of Sesame Varieties
The study showed that most farmers had information about improved varieties
through development agents (extension workers at village level), radio programmes, and
farmer-to-farmer information exchange in the study areas (Table 4). Even though the
farmers had information, they cultivated varieties often sourced from the informal sector
in the study areas. The farmers cultivated improved sesame varieties, but there were
no government-linked sesame seed enterprises or cooperative seed production in the
study areas. Thirty percent of the respondents in Melokoza and Basketo districts adopted
the Humera-1 variety, developed and released by Humera Agricultural Research Centre
(HuARC) in 2010. This variety was developed through mass selection from among local
germplasm collections. Most farmers in Ethiopia and Tanzania used seed of groundnut
landraces for multiple benefits such as good oil quality, grain yield, adaptability to envi-
ronmental stresses, drought tolerance, seed availability, and the ability to adapt to adverse
climatic conditions and to retain seeds for the next cycle of planting [25,33]. The study
areas’ farmers classified Humera-1 and Adi as early-maturing cultivars and Abasena and
Wollega as medium-maturing cultivars with relatively better bacterial blight resistance.
High thousand-seed weight, high oil content, and white seed colour are among the most
essential traits considered in the export standards of sesame [34]. The findings of this study
show the need to design and introduce government-assisted sesame seed enterprises and
cooperative seed production and to strengthen the extension service delivery system to
enhance the dissemination and adoption of improved sesame agricultural technologies
and enhance the livelihoods of the farmers in the study areas.
Most of the respondent farmers (60%) participated in technology transfer activities in
the study areas. Chi-square analysis revealed the presence of highly significant differences
among the four districts in methods of technology transfer (p < 0.000; χ2 = 67.323) (Table 5).
The majority of the farmers reported that FTCs were among the main information and
technology dissemination centres through demonstrations of methods to the farmers.
Therefore, demonstrating improved varieties with the full package of agronomic practices
through on-farm trials and FTCs, strengthening the extension services, and increasing
availability of sesame seeds through engaging government seed enterprises and private
seed producers would boost sesame production and productivity in the study areas.
4.4. Sesame Cropping System and Production Status
Most respondent farmers in the study areas grew sesame as a sole crop (Table 5).
Farmers in Babile and Gursum districts intercropped sesame with sorghum, maize, and
groundnut crops to diversify their cash income and mitigate the adverse effects of crop
failure associated with growing sesame as a sole crop. In line with the current findings,
Mesfin et al. [35] reported sesame intercropping with sorghum and millet in the study
areas. Some farmers practiced sesame intercropping with sorghum and millet crops in
Senegal and Mali [10]. Furthermore, Mkamilo [36] reported sesame intercropping with
maize in southeast Tanzania.
The present study revealed that most of the farmers practiced sesame rotation with
maize, mung bean, haricot bean, and groundnut, mainly to restore of soil fertility and
reduce pest pressure in the four districts (Table 5). Conversely, most interviewees practiced
the monoculture of sesame in Senegal and Mali [10]. The majority of the farmers explained
that the trend of sesame production in the study areas was decreasing, mainly attributing
this trend to a lack of improved varieties, abiotic and biotic stresses, a lack of better
agronomic practices, and poor extension services and market linkages in the study areas.
This result corroborated the findings of Abady et al. [25] in regard to groundnut production
in the same study areas in Ethiopia.
4.5. Constraints to Sesame Production in Ethiopia
Farmers identified lack of access to improved varieties, high cost of seeds, low quality
of seeds, low yield, climate change, insect pests, diseases, weeds, lack of market information,
Sustainability 2021, 13, 11202 14 of 17
and low market price as the most critical constraints affecting sesame production (Table 6).
Most households reported a lack of access to improved seeds as the most crucial constraint
on sesame production due to the lack of a formal seed sector. The majority of the farmers
identified low yield as the second most important constraint in sesame production in the
study areas, suggesting that farmers grow unimproved varieties often sourced from the
informal sector. Similarly, Teklu et al. [37] reported that the low productivity of sesame was
due to a lack of improved and high-yielding varieties, traditional production technologies,
and abiotic and biotic stresses, among other constraints. The authors also reported that
landrace varieties were the primary sources of seed for cultivating the crop in Ethiopia. The
low yield of sesame in SSA is mainly attributable to a lack of high-yielding, well-adapted
varieties and shattering-tolerant cultivars, the prevalence of biotic and abiotic stresses, and
the use of traditional production and harvesting systems [6,10,16–19,37,38]. The respondent
farmers also identified low-quality and expensive sesame seeds sourced from the local
market as one of the important production constraints. For instance, farmers in Basketo
and Melokoza districts bought 1 kg of improved seed with a monetary value of 60 Birr
(1.30 USD). Farmers expressed poor seed systems and lack of quality seed producers as a
bottleneck in sesame production.
Climate change and insect pests are among the most essential yield-limiting factors
mentioned by the sesame growers in the study areas (Table 6). Insect pests primarily
cause yield reduction. A mean yield loss of 25% has been reported due to insect pest
attacks [39]. Similarly, Myint et al. [24] reported that drought and insect pests were among
the major sesame production constraints in Myanmar. Therefore, the development and
introduction of drought-tolerant and insect pest-resistant varieties to the seed system is
crucial to minimize the risk of crop failure due to abiotic and biotic stresses and increase
the crop’s productivity.
Furthermore, farmers in the study areas mentioned a lack of market information and
low market price as among the most critical challenges in sesame production. In the study
areas, there were no market infrastructures or market information delivery systems, and
the growers were forced to sell their produce at a lower price. The market value chain
is not well-developed, which often highly discourages farmers from producing the crop.
For instance, farmers in Basketo and Melokoza districts sold 100 kg of their products
with 1000–3000 Birr (about 22.3–67 USD) at farm gate price but at 3000–3500 Birr (about
67–78 USD) during the study period. The lack of an encouraging production environment
in the study areas highly affected farmers and discouraged them from producing the
crop in a larger quantity and with better quality. In agreement with the current findings,
Myint et al. [24] reported that lower production and productivity in some areas of Myanmar
was due to a lack of market for the farmers. There is a need to improve the sesame value
chain through incorporating improved and high-yielding varieties into the formal seed
system, more expansive use of the best agronomic practices, strengthening the extension
services, and developing market infrastructure and on-time market information delivery.
These attributes can motivate farmers to produce higher quantities of better-quality seed to
the market.
4.6. Market-Preferred Traits of Sesame
Sesame is an important oilseed crop serving various value chains globally. In the
present study, farmers identified white seed colour, higher seed size, true-to-type seed,
higher oil content, and increased thousand-seed weight as the most crucial sesame market-
preferred traits (Table 7). Farmers ranked true-to-type seed as the first most crucial
market-preferred trait, followed by white seed colour and higher oil content. Higher
thousand-seed weight, higher oil content, and white seed colour are among the most
critical traits considered in the export standards of sesame [34]. Therefore, introducing
improved, higher-yielding, higher-thousand-seed weight, higher-oil content, and white-
seeded sesame varieties is considerably important to increasing the crop’s market value.
Sustainability 2021, 13, 11202 15 of 17
4.7. Farmer-Preferred Traits
Farmers identified reasonable market price, resistance to disease, drought tolerance,
resistance to insect pests, high yield, high 1000-seed weight, high oil content, and white
seed colour as the most important traits in the study areas (Table 8). Most of the respondent
farmers ranked reasonable market price as the most important trait, followed by resistance
to diseases, drought tolerance, and resistance to insect pests. The ultimate goal of farmers
when engaging in crop production is to increase productivity and obtain better income
from the market, thereby improving their livelihood. Farmers in the study areas suggested
that varieties with high yield, drought tolerance, and insect pest and disease resistance
were highly preferred. These varieties avert the risks of crop failure due to abiotic and
biotic stresses.
5. Conclusions
Farmers identified limited access to improved seeds as the most critical production
constraint, followed by low yield gains, diseases, and low market price. Other production
constraints included insect pests, lack of market information, and high cost of seed. These
constraints were attributable to the absence of a dedicated breeding programme, lack of
a formal seed sector, poor extension services, and underdeveloped pre- and postharvest
infrastructures. The essential market-preferred traits of sesame included true-to-type seed,
white seed colour, and high seed oil content. The vital farmer-preferred attributes included
reasonable market price, resistance to crop diseases, drought tolerance, resistance to crop
insect pests, high seed yield, high thousand-seed weight, high oil content, white seed colour,
early maturity, and good oil quality in areas such as aroma and taste. Therefore, there is a
need for a dedicated sesame genetic improvement programme that would integrate the
above key production constraints and market- and farmer-preferred traits to develop and
deploy new-generation varieties to enhance stable production, productivity, and adoption
of sesame cultivars in Ethiopia.
Author Contributions: D.H.T.: the main author for the current study; carried out and coordinated
data collection, performed data analysis, conceptualization, data curation, and interpretation of
results and wrote the original draft. H.S.: led supervision and conceptualization, designed the study,
and reviewed and edited the manuscript. A.T.: provided in-country co-supervision and reviewed
and edited the manuscript. S.A.: coordinated data collection, reviewed and edited the manuscript.
All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This work was financially supported by the Ethiopian Agricultural Transformation Agency
(ATA), the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF-CORE) through its Education Grant, and the
Bilateral Ethiopian–Netherlands Effort for Food, Income, and Trade (BENEFIT) partnership program,
Sesame Business Network (SBN) project.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: Not applicable.
Acknowledgments: The Ethiopian Agricultural Transformation Agency (ATA) and the Bilateral
Ethiopian–Netherlands Effort for Food, Income, and Trade (BENEFIT) partnership program, Sesame
Business Network (SBN) project are greatly appreciated for grant support.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
References
1. De la Vega, A.J.; Hall, A.J. Effect of planting date, genotype, and their interactions on sunflower yield: II. Components of oil yield.
Crop Sci. 2002, 42, 1202–1210. [CrossRef]
2. Zheljazkov, V.D.; Vick, B.A.; Ebelhar, M.W.; Buehring, N.; Baldwin, B.S.; Astatkie, T.; Mille, J.F. Yield, oil content, and composition
of sunflower grown at multiple locations in Mississippi. Agron. J. 2008, 100, 635–639. [CrossRef]
3. Wei, W.; Zhang, Y.; Lv, H.; Li, D.; Wang, L.; Zhang, X. Association analysis for quality traits in a diverse panel of Chinese sesame
(Sesamum indicum L.) germplasm. J. Integr. Plant Biol. 2013, 55, 745–758. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2021, 13, 11202 16 of 17
4. Dossa, K.; Wei, X.; Niang, M.; Liu, P.; Zhang, Y.; Wang, L.; Liao, B.; Cissé, N.; Zhang, X.; Diouf, D. Near-infrared reflectance
spectroscopy reveals wide variation in major components of sesame seeds from Africa and Asia. Crop J. 2018, 6, 202–206.
[CrossRef]
5. Gulluoglu, L.; Arioglu, H.; Bakal, H.; Onat, B.; Kurt, C. The Effect of Harvesting on Some Agronomic and Quality Characteristics
of Peanut Grown in the Mediterranean Region of Turkey. Turk. J. Field Crops 2016, 21, 224–232. [CrossRef]
6. Were, B.A.; Onkware, A.O.; Gudu, S.; Welander, M.; Carlsson, A.S. Seed oil content and fatty acid composition in East African
sesame (Sesamum indicum L.) accessions evaluated over 3 years. Field Crops Res. 2006, 97, 254–260. [CrossRef]
7. Anastasi, U.; Sortino, O.; Tuttobene, R. Agronomic performance and grain quality of sesame (Sesamum indicum L.) landraces and
improved varieties grown in a Mediterranean environment. Genet. Resour. Crop Evol. 2017, 64, 127–137. [CrossRef]
8. Gharby, S.; Harhar, H.; Bouzoubaa, Z.; Asdadi, A.; El Yadini, A.; Charrouf, Z. Chemical characterization and oxidative stability of
seeds and oil of sesame grown in Morocco. J. Saudi Soc. Agric. Sci. 2017, 16, 105–111. [CrossRef]
9. Yasothai, R. Chemical Composition of Sesame Oil Cake–Review. Int. J. Sci. Environ. Technol. 2014, 3, 827–835.
10. Dossa, K.; Konteye, M.; Niang, M.; Doumbia, Y.; Cissé, N. Enhancing sesame production in West Africa’s Sahel: A comprehensive
insight into the cultivation of this untapped crop in Senegal and Mali. Agric Food Secur. 2017, 6, 68. [CrossRef]
11. Anilakumar, K.R.; Pal, A.; Khanum, F.; Bawas, A.S. Nutritional, medicinal and industrial uses of sesame (Sesamum indicum L.)
seeds. Agric. Conspec. Sci. 2010, 75, 159–168.
12. Ethiopia Central Agricultural Census Commission. Ethiopian Agricultural Sample Enumeration: Report on the Primary Results of Area,
Production and Yield of Temporary Crops of Private Peasant Holdings in Meher Season; Central Statistic Authority (CSA): Addis Ababa,
Ethiopia, 2020.
13. Gebremedhn, M.B.; Tessema, W.; Gebre, G.G.; Mawcha, K.T.; Assefa, M.K. Value chain analysis of sesame (Sesamum indicum L.) in
Humera district, Tigray, Ethiopia. Cogent Food Agric. 2019, 5, 1705741. [CrossRef]
14. FAOSTAT. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations; FAOSTAT: Rome, Italy, 2019. Available online: http://www.fao.
org/faostat/en/#data/QC (accessed on 30 August 2021).
15. Ethiopia Central Agricultural Census Commission. Ethiopian Agricultural Sample Enumeration: Report on the Primary Results of Area,
Production and Yield of Temporary Crops of Private Peasant Holdings in Meher Season; Central Statistic Authority (CSA): Addis Ababa,
Ethiopia, 2019.
16. Wijnands, J.H.M.; Biersteker, J.; Van Loo, E.N. Oilseeds business opportunities in Ethiopia. In Public Private Partnership in Oil Seed;
Wageningen University and Research: Wageningen, The Netherlands, 2009.
17. Nyongesa, B.O.; Were, B.A.; Gudu, S.; Dangasuk, O.G.; Onkware, A.O. Genetic diversity in cultivated sesame (Sesamum indicum L.)
and related wild species in East Africa. J. Crop Sci. Biotech. 2013, 16, 9–15. [CrossRef]
18. Woldesenbet, D.T.; Tesfaye, K.; Bekele, E. Genetic diversity of sesame germplasm collection (Sesamum indicum L.): Implication for
conservation, improvement and use. Int. J. Biotechnol. Mol. Biol. Res. 2015, 6, 7–18.
19. Anyanga, W.O.; Hohl, K.H.; Burg, A.; Gaubitzer, S.; Rubaihayo, P.R.; Vollmann, J.; Gibson, P.T.; Fluch, S.; Sehr, E.M. Towards the
Selection of Superior Sesame Lines Based on Genetic and Phenotypic Characterisation for Uganda. J. Agric. Sci. 2017, 9, 13–14.
20. Tadele, A. Sesame (Sesamum indicum L.) Research in Ethiopia: A Review of Past Work and Potential and Future Prospects. In
Sesame and Safflower Newsletter 20; Martínez, J.F., Ed.; IAS: Córdoba, Spain, 2005.
21. Ministry of Agriculture. Plant Variety Release. Protection and Seed Quality Control Directorate. Crop variety register: Addis
Ababa. Ethiopia 2019, 22, 330.
22. Altieri, M.A.; Koohafkan, P. Enduring Farms: Climate Change, Smallholders and Traditional Farming Communities. In
Environment and Development Series 6; Third World Network: Pulau Pinang, Malaysia, 2008.
23. Chambers, R. Rapid Appraisal: Rapid, Relaxed and Participatory; IDS Discussion Paper 311; Institute of Development Studies:
Brighton, UK, 1992; p. 90.
24. Myint, D.; Gilani, S.A.; Kawase, M.; Watanabe, K.N. Sustainable Sesame (Sesamum indicum L.) Production through Improved
Technology: An Overview of Production, Challenges, and Opportunities in Myanmar. Sustainability 2020, 12, 3515. [CrossRef]
25. Abady, S.; Shimelis, H.; Janila, P. Farmers’ perceived constraints to groundnut production, their variety choice and preferred
traits in eastern Ethiopia: Implications for drought-tolerance breeding. J. Crop Imrov. 2019, 33, 1–17. [CrossRef]
26. Sori, O. Factors affecting groundnut market supply in Western Oromia, Ethiopia. Heliyon 2021, 7, 1–5. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
27. Anteneh, A. Development of Environmental Friendly Bioinoculate for Peanut (Arachis Hypogea L.) Production in Eastern Ethiopia.
Environ. Syst. Res. 2017, 6, 23. [CrossRef]
28. Endrias, O. Market Chain Analysis of Sesame in Melekoza and Basketo Districts. Bus. Econ. J. 2021, 11, 342.
29. SPSS. Statistical Package for Social Sciences; SPSS: Chicago, IL, USA, 2020.
30. Mendola, M. Farm household production theories: A review of “institutional” and “behavioral” responses. Asian Dev. Rev. 2007,
24, 49–68. [CrossRef]
31. Abraha, M.T.; Shimelis, H.A.; Laing, M.D.; Assefa, K. Achievements and gaps in tef productivity improvement practices in the
marginal areas of Northern Ethiopia: Implications for future research directions. Int. J. Agric. Sustain. 2017, 15, 42–53. [CrossRef]
32. Rouamba, A.; Shimelis, H.; Drabo, I.; Laing, M.; Gangashetty, P.; Mathew, I.; Mrema, E.; Shayanowako, A.I.T. Constraints to
Pearl Millet (Pennisetum glaucum) Production and Farmers’ Approaches to Striga hermonthica Management in Burkina Faso.
Sustainability 2021, 13, 8460. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2021, 13, 11202 17 of 17
33. Daudi, H.; Shimelis, H.; Laing, M.; Okori, P.; Mponda, O. Groundnut Production Constraints, Farming Systems, and Farmer-
Preferred Traits in Tanzania. J. Crop Imrov. 2018, 32, 812–828. [CrossRef]
34. Ministry of Agriculture (MOA). Crop Extension Package and Manual; MOA: Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2018; pp. 126–132.
35. Mesfin, H.; Mikil, T.; Agajie, T.; Eyob, M. Export type Sesame and Groundnuts production and marketing In Agricultural Technology
Evaluation Adoption and Marketing; EARO: Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2004; pp. 101–119.
36. Mkamilo, G.S. Maize-Sesame Intercropping in Southeast Tanzania: Farmers’ Practices and Perceptions, and Intercrop Performance.
Ph.D. Thesis, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands, 2004; p. 112.
37. Teklu, D.H.; Shimelis, H.; Tesfaye, A.; Mashilo, J.; Zhang, X.; Zhang, Y.; Dossa, K.; Shayanowako, A.I.T. Genetic Variability and
Population Structure of Ethiopian Sesame (Sesamum indicum L.) Germplasm Assessed through Phenotypic Traits and Simple
Sequence Repeats Markers. Plants 2021, 10, 1129. [CrossRef]
38. Were, B.A.; Lee, M.; Stymne, S. Variation in seed oil content and fatty acid composition of sesame (Sesamum indicum L.) and its
wild relatives in Kenya. Swed. Seed Assoc. 2001, 4, 178–183.
39. Weiss, E.A. Sesame. Oilseed Crops, 2nd ed.; Blackwell Science: London, UK, 2000.