diff --git "a/data/part_2/066911567540fa594c8f0e285fa5513c.json" "b/data/part_2/066911567540fa594c8f0e285fa5513c.json" new file mode 100644--- /dev/null +++ "b/data/part_2/066911567540fa594c8f0e285fa5513c.json" @@ -0,0 +1 @@ +{"metadata":{"id":"066911567540fa594c8f0e285fa5513c","source":"gardian_index","url":"https://cgspace.cgiar.org/rest/bitstreams/1c32250e-0ddb-47ca-9b93-0440032ab52b/retrieve"},"pageCount":78,"title":"Increasing Fruit and Vegetable Intake on Low-Income Population in Vietnam and Nigeria Through Food Systems Innovations NIGERIA MARKET LEVEL ASSESSMENT REPORT","keywords":[],"chapters":[{"head":"Executive Summary","index":1,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":68,"text":"Using retailer sample from two market (180 retailers) and two neighborhood (87 retailers) locations, this Market Level Assessment (MLA) reveals overlaps and parallels in retailer characteristics, business modules as well as returns on investment. The MLA was carried out across four fruit and vegetable groups peculiar to the Nigerian environment namely Dark Green Leafy Vegetables (DGLV), Vitamin A Rich Fruits (VARF), Other Fruits (OF) and Other vegetables (OV)."},{"index":2,"size":228,"text":"In the market locations (Ojoo and Moniya), fruits and vegetables vendors were mainly female, sole owners of the enterprises, with low labour requirement. The vendors sold mainly Dark Green Leafy Vegetables (DGLV) and Other Fruits (OF). Historical purchase and sales outlay were shown to have dwindled when compared to 5 years recall. A large proportion of the vendors sold products from individual farms; however, the main external suppliers seem to be from farmers and rural brokers, with varying transactional characteristics in the market vendor and supplier relationship. Record keeping and contractual agreements with suppliers were very low in the retailer-supplier characteristics, while about one-third of the retailers received sorted commodities from their suppliers. The main service provided by retailers to suppliers was mainly in terms of provision of transportation to their stalls. Retailers sold to an average of 1, 741 clients, however only 56 were regulars and mainly direct consumers and other traditional retailers. The main complaints from clients to retailers were related to colour and firmness of the products bought. Market retailers of fruits and vegetables in Nigeria have low valued assets and low technology, with many selling on the roadsides; and physical assets valued at N17, 914.55. Business costs reveals weekly variable costs of N1, 088.89, inventory cost of N5911.77 and revenue of N4964.85 for average sale of 858.77kg; returning a loss of N94.61/kg at ."},{"index":3,"size":180,"text":"Neighbourhood retailers (Abaeja and Bagadaje) were mainly female vegetable (DGLV and OV) vendors, with average age of 46 years, and involved in other income generating activities. Similar to market vendors, the main supply was from farmers and wholesalers for an average of 45 suppliers within a year, with only 14 regulars. There was a very small proportion of neighbourhood vendors that kept supply record, or had a contractual agreement with suppliers; an indication of an informal market setting. The main clients were also direct consumers, and 44 regarded as regulars. While there was no vendor that kept record of sales, about a fifth of the sample had some form of contractual agreements with their clients, especially in proving services related to price and volume discounts. Business characteristics reveal that neighbourhood vendors were more likely to use a stall or a space within their dwelling residence for selling their commodities. With inventory cost of N4135.54, variable input cost of N516.49 and revenue of N2172.47 for average weekly sales of 89.6kg, a negative return of N132.25 per kg at the neighbourhood market."},{"index":4,"size":52,"text":"While there were some transactional and functional differences across retailers in main market and neighborhoods, the MLA revealed some similarities as well. Market vendors were able to provide more services to suppliers than neighbourhood vendors, while they also received more from suppliers. More Neighbourhood vendors also received sorted commodities, which may account"}]},{"head":"INTRODUCTION","index":2,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":186,"text":"The intake of fruit and vegetable has been reportedly low in developing countries like Nigeria. This is even more so for the low-income population all over the country for whom fruits, and vegetables may seem luxury goods. The Fruit and Vegetable (FVN) project in Nigeria is premised on increasing fruit and vegetable intake among this economic group through supply and demand side interventions. As part of the baseline data collection for the FVN project, a market level assessment (MLA) was conducted in order to provide contextual information on fruit and vegetable availability and accessibility in neighborhoods of interest. The MLA provides foundational information for a supply side intervention focused on increasing product assortment and improving quality of fruits and vegetables from the perspective of retailers. More specifically, the MLA explores spatial differences across fruit and vegetable retailers and retail markets in (Oyo State) in Nigeria; while also examining how product and market type disaggregation reveal important characteristics of the fruit and vegetable markets. This information would facilitate understanding of how retailing dimensions can help to reveal possible pathways to change fruit and vegetable intake in Nigeria."}]},{"head":"Study Location","index":3,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":118,"text":"The FVN study was conducted in Abaeja and Bagadaje, two neighborhoods in Akinyele Local Government Area (LGA) in Ibadan, Oyo state. Ibadan is the capital city of Oyo state and is the third most populous city in Nigeria and largest in geographic area. Abaeja is the more central and urbanized neighborhood, while Bagadaje is more peripheral and can be described as peri urban. The neighbourhood aspects of the study took place in these two locales. There are two major markets where residents of these neighbourhoods shop, namely Ojoo and Moniya, and these were also surveyed in the study (See map in Figure 1). Ojoo market is frequented by residents of Abeaje while Moniya market serves the Bagadeje community. "}]},{"head":"Study phases","index":4,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":8,"text":"The MLA was conducted in four different phases"},{"index":2,"size":24,"text":"• A Scoping phase conducted in June 2019 to provide information on the scale and scope of the market (see details in appendix 1)"},{"index":3,"size":30,"text":"• A Retailers Census conducted in July 2019 to capture all vendors selling fruits and vegetables in focal neighborhoods and relevant markets at the time of the survey (appendix 2)"},{"index":4,"size":10,"text":"• The main MLA Survey conducted in Aug/Sept 2019: and"},{"index":5,"size":19,"text":"• MLA Measures/Weight conversion survey to convert all local measures to standard measures conducted in Sept/Oct 2019 (appendix 3)."},{"index":6,"size":18,"text":"The discussion that follows is focused on the main MLA survey (see appendix 4 for the survey questions)."}]},{"head":"Market level assessment Survey","index":5,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":84,"text":"As earlier noted, the survey was carried out in 2 major fruits and vegetable markets in Oyo State, Nigeria. These are Ojoo(40%) and Moniya (60%) markets. The sample size was 180 retailers, drawn in a 2:3 proportion between Ojoo and Moniya (See figure 2). A parallel survey was carried out among neighborhood vendors as well with 66 percent of vendors in Abaeja and 33.7 percent in Bagadaje. The results of the MLA are discussed with respect to product categorization as well as market type. "}]},{"head":"MAIN MARKET RETAILERS Product Classification in Main Markets","index":6,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":37,"text":"The main commodities sold were categorized into 4 viz: Dark green leafy vegetables (DGLV-51.67%), Vitamin A Rich Fruits (VARF-36.67%), Other Fruits(OF-43.33%) and Other Vegetables (OV-33.33). The composition of each of these categorizations is presented in Figure 3. "}]},{"head":"Description of Fruit and Vegetable Retailers Across Product Categories in the Main Markets","index":7,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":116,"text":"The socio-demographic and enterprise characteristics of the retailers are presented in this section. The results presented in Table 1 reveals that the average age of retailers was 48.2±13 years with female dominance (97%). Sole ownership was the norm, with 98% of the retailers reported as owners; and again, with low male representation in ownership (3.4%). Being mainly sole ownership, results show that 98% were self-funded, with female dominance. The average number of years of experience was ~11 years, with about 23% of the retailers producing their commodities as crops in the past year. Some retailers sold their commodities in other locations(41%) apart from the surveyed markets; and about half (49%) of the retailers had other businesses."},{"index":2,"size":113,"text":"Differences were observed across the vendors of the different categories of fruits and vegetables for some of these characteristics. DGLV retailers were the oldest in the group (50 years); while the youngest was among the OV retailers (45.7 years). Male and female distribution was similar across the groups. Among those who produced their own commodities, vegetable farmers topped the list at 29%(37%-DGLV; and 18%-OV), while 17% of the fruit retailers cropped own commodities (14%-VARF and 15%-OF). Retailers of DGLV again seem to be more diversified with about 57% of them involved in other forms of businesses, while 48% of VARF and 46% each of OF and OV retailers were involved in other businesses. "}]},{"head":"Functional Status of Retailer","index":8,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":44,"text":"In this section, we present the functioning of the retailers of fruits and vegetables in the study areas. These include general transactional characteristics of the retailers, as well as historical records of purchase and sales of commodities. The results are presented in Table 2."}]},{"head":"Retailers who Sold Own produce","index":9,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":60,"text":"Our results also revealed that almost 93% of the retailers who cropped the produce actually sell them. Of the vendors who sell their own products, 87.5% and 97.4% were fruit and vegetable vendors respectively; with 100% of the DGLV and VARF selling their own farm produce, while 83% and 92% of OF and OV vendors sell their own farm produce."}]},{"head":"Historical Outlay of Sales","index":10,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":16,"text":"Weekly volume of commodity purchased in high and low seasons also reveals interesting estimates over time( "}]},{"head":"Retailer-Supplier Nexus","index":11,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":52,"text":"Fruits and Vegetable retailers in this study purchased their commodities from a variety of suppliers. The characteristics of this relationship are presented in Table 3; showing types of suppliers, number of suppliers, quantity purchased and price, transaction characteristics, service provided by suppliers as well as complaints from the retailers to the suppliers."}]},{"head":"Current Stock of Inventory (Volume purchased)","index":12,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":48,"text":"The current volume purchased (at the time of this survey) on the average was 280.85kg at N74.98/kg. Fruit vendors purchased a higher volume at 365.55kg, compared to vegetable sellers at 238.44kg. Specifically, VARF and OF vendors purchased 409.75kg and 385.21kg, respectively; higher than DGLV (236.71kg) and OV (273.05kg),respectively."}]},{"head":"Main Suppliers","index":13,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":53,"text":"The results show that 92.7% of retailers who were involved in farm production sold their own produce (n=41). However, apart from those who sold from their own products, the main supply source of the retailers was directly from farmers (73%), followed by wholesalers (20.6%). Others include rural brokers (11%),importers (1%) and agribusiness (<1%)."},{"index":2,"size":75,"text":"In addition to sourcing from other suppliers, DGLV and VARF vendors sold all the fruits and vegetable commodities produced on their own farms. Commodities supplied directly from farmers as well as rural brokers were higher with fruit vendors (81% and 13.5%) than vegetable vendors (72% and 7.6%), respectively. Wholesalers supplied more of vegetable vendors (24%), while fruit vendors were a little more likely to get supplies from agribusinesses and importers (1.04%), than vegetable vendors (0.8%)."},{"index":3,"size":37,"text":"On the average, the retailers had 47 suppliers in the year, with 13 being regular suppliers. In general, fruit vendors had 60 suppliers with 16 of them regarded as regular. VARF and OF vendors averaged the same "}]},{"head":"Figure 4: Percentage Distribution Of Retailers By Agreements With Suppliers","index":14,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":79,"text":"Transactional Characteristics in Retailer-Supplier Relationship Transactional characteristics explored in this survey includes purchase of sorted commodities, contract agreements and record keeping. These characteristics place premium on the products purchased and sold by the vendors on the one hand and helps to keep track of retail activities on the other. Only 31% of the retailers purchased sorted products from their suppliers; with the lower representation among vegetable retailers (29%). Within the \"All fruit\" retailer sample, about 34% bought sorted products."},{"index":2,"size":86,"text":"Whereas record keeping is important in agricultural supply chains (Kahan, 2013), the results show inadequacy among all retailers with respect to record keeping in their business activities. On average, ~2% of all retailers kept records of business transactions with their suppliers. In the disaggregation, at least 2% of fruit retailers kept records while less than 1% of vegetable sellers did the same. This reveals a high level of informality in transactions among agricultural retailers, and is also indicative of low levels of literacy in the sector."},{"index":3,"size":106,"text":"Contract agreements have been reported as key to maintaining inventory supplies in agricultural marketing (Naik and Suresh, 2018). In this MLA survey, we found that just about 14.5% of all retailers had an agreement with their suppliers. Vegetable farmers were found to be in higher representation in this category (~19%), while 12% of fruit retailers responded to having an agreement (see Figure 4). This again shows a high level of informality within the marketing node of the fruit and vegetable value chain in Nigeria. The consequences may be irregularity in supply, inconsistent standards as well as reduced capacity to cope with supply shocks in the market. "}]},{"head":"Services Provided to Suppliers and Received by Suppliers","index":15,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":50,"text":"Over half (53%) of the retailers did not provide any service to their suppliers (Table 3). However, 27% provided their own transport, 11% gave money advance and 3% had other transportation arrangements with the suppliers. Approximately 2% of the retailers provided inputs and harvest, respectively as services to their suppliers."},{"index":2,"size":84,"text":"At least 62% of fruit retailers and 46% of vegetable retailers did not provide any service to the suppliers. Overall, vegetable retailers provide more services to suppliers than fruit retailers. The service with the highest proportion of retailers involved was provision of own transport, which was distributed as 28%, 20%, 1% and 26% across DGLV, VARF, OF and OV retailers. Also, ~14% of DGLV and OV retailers provided advance payments to suppliers, while about 11% and 9% of OF and OV retailers did same."},{"index":3,"size":20,"text":"In general, 65% of the suppliers did not provide any form of service to the retailers in their business dealings."},{"index":4,"size":93,"text":"Of those who provided a service, the most reported was packaging of produce, received by ~19% of the retailers, this is followed by 17% who got delivery of produce to their stalls, and 11% who received produce on credit. Only about 3% of the suppliers sorted the produce for the retailers and less than 1% cleaned the produce supplied. Specifically, more vegetable retailers received delivery at their stalls (18%), credit sales (12%) and packaging (22%). Sorting seems to be the most important service from the point of view of the fruit retailers (~4%)."}]},{"head":"Quality Complaints made by Retailers to Suppliers","index":16,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":88,"text":"in the survey, up to 38% of the retailers complained about produce quality to their suppliers. The complaints ranged from dirty products, unacceptable colour, variety and firmness, as well as lack of a proper volume measure, rottenness and bruising of the products (see Figure 4). Rottenness was the modal complaint made by the retailers (12.8%), and this was reported by 15.6% and 11.4% of fruit and vegetable retailers respectively. This was followed by lack of firmness (8.3%) reported by 9.4% and 7.6% of fruit and vegetable retailers respectively. "}]},{"head":"Retailer-Buyer/Client Nexus","index":17,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":19,"text":"The relationship between retailers and buyers of fruits and vegetables is presented in this section (Table 4, Figure 5)."}]},{"head":"Current Weekly Sales","index":18,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":3,"text":"The result in "}]},{"head":"Main Clients(Buyers)","index":19,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":70,"text":"The results, as shown in Table 4 reveals five (5) main buyers of fruits and vegetables viz, Direct consumers (75.6%), traditional retailers (28.3%), street/sidewalk caterers/restaurants (18.9%), ambulant street vendors /hawkers (14.4%) and neighbourhood supermarkets (<1%). Fruit retailers as a group sold more to direct consumers than vegetable retailers (72%). However, vegetable retailers sold more to traditional retailers and street caterers (34% and 23.5%) than fruit sellers (28% and 18.9%) ."},{"index":2,"size":59,"text":"In relation to the buyers, an average of 1, 741 buyers interacted with the retailers in the past year with fruit and vegetable sellers reporting sales to 2417 and 1329 clients respectively. However, only 3% of the average number of customers (~56) were regular buyers, distributed as 56, 74, 78, 53 across DGLV, VARF, OF and OV retailers, respectively."}]},{"head":"Transactional Characteristics with Clients","index":20,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":65,"text":"Transactional characteristics with buyers reveal that only 35% of the retailers sell sorted products, and fruit retailers top the group at 41%; while only 33% of vegetable retailers reported sorting their produce before sales. This translates down the product category where that 42% and 41% of VARF and OF retailers sorted their products and 32% and 35% of DGLV and OV retailers sorted their products."},{"index":2,"size":56,"text":"Again, there was low level of record keeping among the retailers with respect to transaction with their buyers as results revealed that only 3.3% of the retailers had record of sales with the highest across vegetable retailers (4.3% for DGLV and OV retailers, respectively). Only about 2% of VARF and OF retailers kept records of sales."},{"index":3,"size":54,"text":"Considering the low proportion of regular buyers, it is not unexpected that only about 13% have a contract with their clients. The proportion of fruit and vegetable retailers that had agreements with their clients was 14% (14% and 12% with VARF and OF retailers)and 15% (20% and 8% for DGLV and OV retailers), respectively. "}]},{"head":"Services Provided to Clients","index":21,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":47,"text":"In general, over half (59%) of the retailers did not provide any service other than selling to the buyers (see Figure 5). However, services provided by others include price discount (36%); volume discount (37%), sales on credit (10%), packaging (20%) and some form of special sorting (5%)."}]},{"head":"Figure 5:Percentage Distribution of Retailers by Services Provided to Clients","index":22,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":43,"text":"While price discounts and credit sales were more common among vegetable retailers (39.4% and 12%, respectively), volume discount and special sorting was more usual among fruit retailers (39.6% and 5%, respectively). Approximately 18% of both fruits and vegetable retailers were involved in packaging."}]},{"head":"Quality Complaints from Clients to Retailers","index":23,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":118,"text":"The proportion of retailers who received complaints about the fruits and vegetables sold to the buyers was only 15% (table 4). This may not be surprising given the low percentage of regular buyers of the total average of 1741 buyers in a year. The main complaints received from the buyers were related to colour (9%), firmness (7%), rottenness (6%) and size (4%). Others were connected to bruising (3%), variety and dirtiness (1%, respectively). The most common quality complaints among fruit retailers were related to size(4%), firmness (7%) and rottenness (7%). Vegetable retailers on the other hand received complaints more in the aspects of dirtiness(1.5%), unacceptable variety (1.5%), Colour (11.4%) and bruising (4.6%) when compared to the fruit retailers."}]},{"head":"Assets Outlay of Retailers","index":24,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":41,"text":"In this section, we explore the physical and enterprise assets used by the retailers (Table 5). This include location and type of market space as well as display items, vehicles, lamps etc. The average value of these assets is also presented."}]},{"head":"Location of Sales","index":25,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":83,"text":"Majority of the retailers (~66%) were located on the roadside for their marketing activities, while 25% used a permanent table not on the roadside. Only 7% of the retailers had stalls/shops within the market. Less than 2% of the retailers sold from their home premises while about 1% were hawkers and wheelbarrow pushers, respectively. Fruit sellers sold more in stall (8%) and on permanent tables (29%), whereas vegetable retailers were more likely to be found selling on roadsides (72%) and at home (2%)."}]},{"head":"Physical Assets in Fruits and Vegetable Retailing","index":26,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":142,"text":"The most important assets owned by the retailers were display items as reported by ~93% of the respondents. This includes plates and bowls used to both as a means of display and measure. Display in cane baskets was reported by 76% of the retailers; and up to 46% had commercial umbrella to protect them and their wares from sun and rain. Also, about 79% had a bench/stool either for seating or for display. Ownership of a lamp was reported by only 32% of the retailers and a fuel generator was reported by less than 1% of the retailers. With regards to product storage, 62.5% had a store for their products, while no one had a refrigerator. In terms of mobility, only 2% had a motorcycle, and none reported having any other form of transportation, while 73% of the retailers had a phone."},{"index":2,"size":85,"text":"Specifically, more fruit retailers had cane baskets (90%), commercial umbrella (54%), wheelbarrows (6%)lamps, (38%), stores (63%) and benches (83%). On the other hand , more vegetable retailers reported display items (94%) and phones (82%). Generator was reported by only one fruit retailer, while more value adding assets such as refrigerators (for time value) and vehicles(place values) were not reported. This implies a low-level resource base for fruits and vegetable retailers in the study areas, with implications for the quality of commodities as well as profitability."},{"index":3,"size":64,"text":"The average total value of assets owned by the retailers in this survey was estimated at N17, 914.55. Using a straight-line depreciation method at 10%, a depreciation estimates of N1, 791/ annum is to be valued in the business outlay of the retailers. However, this may not be useful, since most of the assets are already classified as variable inputs in the retailers' outlay. "}]},{"head":"Business Costs and Profit Outlay of Retailers","index":27,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":46,"text":"In this section, we report the indices that make up the business cycle of the retailers. This includes a description of labour use, variable inputs, business costs, volume sold, and revenue generated and profit. The results are presented in Table 6, Figure 6 and Figure 7."}]},{"head":"Labour use in Fruit and Vegetable retailing","index":28,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":85,"text":"Findings reveal that labour use in fruits and vegetable markers in Nigeria is low. On average, retailers had one (1) daily worker employed in their enterprises, with about 2 family members working in the enterprises. These figures were confirmed across all product categories. However, DGLV retailers had approximately 3 family members working in the enterprise. This may suggest that some other family members were traders in their own rights as may be seen by about 36% of the retailers reporting other family members as traders."}]},{"head":"Business Cost Outlay","index":29,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":39,"text":"Costs of Goods sold, i. e business costs (Figure 6) were estimated as the addition of costs of variable inputs and inventory purchased. This helped to estimate how much the retailers spent in a week on their retailing enterprise."},{"index":2,"size":112,"text":"The other variable inputs estimated in this survey include electricity, fuel for generators, taxes, water, association fees, telephone, pest-control, and other miscellaneous expenses. The average weekly business costs on variable inputs including labour expenses was an average of N921.41. This is quite low and highlights once again the marginal livelihoods of most fruit and vegetable retailers. Fruit retailers had higher weekly business costs at N1, 088.89 (N1,118.26-VARF and N1,053.83-OF); while vegetable retailers have business, costs estimated at N762.79 (N808.93-DGLV and N761.69-OV). These findings show that business costs in vegetable retailing may be significantly lower than that of fruit retailing, with implications for market entry and profit maximization among low resource agricultural retailers."},{"index":3,"size":60,"text":"Inventory is a key input in calculating business cost. Total inventory purchased was estimated as 280kg at N74/kg, giving an inventory cost of N5911. 77. Inventory supply was higher for vegetable retailers (N 8.082.27) than fruit retailers (N 5, 725.1), mainly as a result of the unit price of vegetables being higher (N 85.75) than that of fruits (N 66.72)."},{"index":4,"size":14,"text":"Overall weekly business cost was therefore estimated as N5, 878.82, disaggregated as N4,277. 7). "}]},{"head":"Estimation of Profit and Profitability Indices in Fruit and Vegetable Retailing","index":30,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":54,"text":"Retailers were requested to estimate their weekly profit per KG of fruits/vegetables sold. The results (Table 6) revealed a reported profit of N1,200 per kg with fruits and vegetable retailers reporting N1,104.16 and N1,130.79, respectively. It is however interesting to note that the reported profit per KG was significantly higher than the estimated profit. "}]},{"head":"Total weekly business cost including inventory Weekly Revenue","index":31,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":65,"text":"Following from the estimated weekly business costs ad revenue, we estimate the weekly profit to fruit and vegetable retailing in the study. Our findings show a loss estimated of -N94/kg. It was unexpected that fruit retailers would have much higher losses (N116.93) than vegetable retailers (N82.89); when the higher business cost outlay is put into consideration. The least loss was witnessed among DGLV retailers (N52.8). "}]},{"head":"SECTION 2 NEIGHBOURHOOD FRUIT AND VEGETABLE RETAILERS","index":32,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":49,"text":"A similar analysis was also conducted for fruit and vegetable retailers in the two focal neighborhoods. These tended to be smaller scattered standalone stalls along traffic routes or retailers selling out of their homes. The discussion in this section will closely follow the main market discussion for easy comparison."}]},{"head":"Product Categorisation in Neighbourhood Markets","index":33,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":79,"text":"Among neighborhood vendors, vegetable retailers formed the bulk of the sampled respondents (94.2%), with DGLV and OV products making up 72% and ~70%, respectively(Figure 8). Fruit retailers made up 45% of the neighborhood retailers, disaggregated between VARF and OF as 22% and 41.9%, respectively. We found that the same pattern was followed across the two neighbourhoods with vegetable retailers being the majority. This may be an indication that vegetable consumption is higher than fruit consumption in the study area; "}]},{"head":"Description of Fruits and Vegetable Retailers Across Product Categories in Neighbourhood Markets","index":34,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":14,"text":"A description of retailer socio-demographic characteristics across product categories is presented in Table 7."},{"index":2,"size":55,"text":"The average age of neighbourhood retailers was 45 years, with the oldest being in the OV categories at 46 years old. There was once again female dominance in the neighbourhood markets with ~99% female participation, and ownership. All neighbourhood retail enterprises are self-funded by retailers with at least 8 years of experience across product categories."},{"index":3,"size":60,"text":"Only about 14% of the retailers cropped their produce in the past year; while about 16% sold in other locations apart from the neighbourhood surveyed. A high proportion (73%) of the neighbourhood retailers reported having other sources of income; an indication that neighbourhood fruit and vegetable retailing may not provide enough revenue to serve as a sole source of income. "}]},{"head":"Functional Status of Retailers in Neighbourhood Markets","index":35,"paragraphs":[]},{"head":"Retailers who Sold Own Produce","index":36,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":45,"text":"About two-third of the retailers who cropped their produce sold from own production, with all VARF retailers selling from their farm produce and 57% of OF retailers doing the same. Overall, 57% of fruit and 67% of vegetable retailers who cropped their produce sold them. "}]},{"head":"Historical Outlay in Purchase and Sales","index":37,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":159,"text":"In comparing historical sales figures, the weekly volume purchased reduced significantly between the present period and the previous 5 years recall. Volume purchased 5 years ago was at least greater than present purchase by 80Kg during the high season. This pattern was similar across all product categories(see Figure 9), with the highest differences in inventory purchase when compared with 5 years ago among the DGLV retailers (220kg) and least among the VARF retailers(10kg). Minimum and maximum weekly sales presented in Figure 10, shows that fruit retailers had higher sales than vegetable retailers. Specifically, fruit retailers had the highest maximum weekly sales at 245kg(VARF-266KG and OF-222KG), while vegetable retailers averaged 209kg maximum sales per week (DGLV-231kg; OV-160kg). Minimum weekly sale was on the average estimated at 76kg for the pooled sample, with the vegetable retailers averaging 85kg and fruit retailers reporting 92kg. Differences in sales reported as maximum and minimum are dependent on business cycles, seasonality, and other demand/supply shifters. "}]},{"head":"Retailer and Supplier Nexus in Neighbourhood Markets","index":38,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":17,"text":"In this section, we explore major suppliers, services to and from suppliers, as well as inventory complaints."}]},{"head":"Current Stock of Inventory (Volume purchased)","index":39,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":93,"text":"Current inventory purchased by neighbourhood retailers was estimated at 323.41kg at N75.96/kg, almost double the reported inventory purchased in high season (Table 9). This value reflects a high supply of fruits and vegetables in the markets. While vegetable retailers had estimated inventory purchase of 333.51kg at N76.71/KG; fruit retailers purchased 179.8kg at N55.93. Again, we see that the unit price of fruits is lower than that of vegetables in the market. This may be connected to the availability of high-volume vegetables (onion, red-bell peppers and garden eggs) during the period of this survey."}]},{"head":"Main Suppliers","index":40,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":155,"text":"Apart from supplies from own production, (Table 9), the main origin of supplies (see figure 11) for neighbourhood retailers was directly from farmers (86%), similar to that obtained with retailers in the main markets. Wholesalers serviced 45%, while rural brokers supplied 10% of the fruits and vegetables retailed in neighborhoods. All the neighbourhood fruit retailers received supplies directly from farmers, while more vegetable retailers (47%) received from wholesalers. This may reflect the fact that retailers (both in the main markets and neighbourhood markets) are able to obtain their better supplies in terms of quantity and prices from farmers and likely rural brokers. On average, the neighbourhood retailers had 45 suppliers; with DGLV retailers reporting the highest at 52; and the least being from OV retailers. However, regular suppliers were at best a third of the total number of suppliers ( 14), spread across DGLV, VARF, OF and OV as 16, 19, 14 and 13, respectively. "}]},{"head":"Transactional Characteristics in Retailer-Supply Relationship","index":41,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":53,"text":"In terms of best practices in business relationships, we examined retailers with respect to purchase of quality (sorted) inventory, contractual agreements and record keeping. The results (Table 9) showed a below average (~38%) response regarding purchase of sorted products. This seemed to be more relevant to fruit retailers (44%) than for vegetable retailers."},{"index":2,"size":61,"text":"Very few retailers had contractual agreements with their suppliers (3.5%), distributed as 2.5% and 2.6% for fruit and vegetable retailers, respectively. Also, only 3.5% of the neighbourhood retailers kept records of purchase with suppliers. Similar to the results obtained from retailers in the main market, this is further an indication of an informal commodity market, with retailers exhibiting low literacy levels."}]},{"head":"Services Provided to and Received from Suppliers","index":42,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":95,"text":"Neighbourhood retailers seemed to have too low volume of transactions to provide services to suppliers; with up to 65% not providing any services (Table 9). The main service provided were related to transportation (22%). Also, suppliers mainly did not provide services to the retailers (86%). The main services provided were in form of packaging (10%). The independent nature of the small volume neighborhood retailer made it impossible to take advantage of economies of scale, thus they were unable to either receive special services from their suppliers to provide such services to the suppliers in return."}]},{"head":"Quality Complaints Made by Retailers to Suppliers","index":43,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":64,"text":"We see that quality complaints remained relatively low even for neighborhood vendors as reported by only 36% of the retailers. With less than 40 % retailers purchasing sorted products, it is not unsurprising that a similar proportion reported complaints While, this may suggest purchase of good quality products, it becomes imperative to review standardization and feedback mechanisms in fruits and vegetables markets in Nigeria."},{"index":2,"size":42,"text":"The main quality complaints were related to rotten products (11.6%); with up to 18% of fruit retailers and 12% of vegetable retailers reporting this. The next was related to firmness (4.7%), with equal proportion of reporting among fruits and vegetable sellers (5%). "}]},{"head":"Retailer-Buyer/Client Nexus in Neighbourhood Markets","index":44,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":29,"text":"In this section, we examine the relationship between the fruits and vegetable retailers and their buyers(customers), including estimated volume of sales, main clients, services and quality complaints (Table 10)."}]},{"head":"Current Weekly Sales","index":45,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":34,"text":"Average weekly sales of fruits and vegetables at the time of this survey was estimated at 89.6kg at N78.8. Fruit retailers had higher sales at 90kg; while vegetable retailers sold an average of 86.6kg."}]},{"head":"Main Clients (Buyers) in Neighbourhood Markets","index":46,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":50,"text":"Fruits and vegetables in the neighborhoods are mainly sold directly to consumers(96%) with minimal sales to Ambulant vendors/hawkers (8%) and other traditional retailers (6%)-See Figure 13. The average number of clients served in the past year was estimated at 1256, with only about 44 of them regarded as regular clients. "}]},{"head":"Transactional Characteristics of Fruits and Vegetable Retailers in Neighbourhood Markets","index":47,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":64,"text":"An indication of value addition and a more personal relationships with clients is seen among the neighbourhood retailers; with respect to sorting of products (Table 10). More than 50% of the retailers sorted their commodities before selling to clients. This was again more prevalent among fruit retailers (59%) than vegetable retailers (48%), similar to what was found among the retailers in the main markets."},{"index":2,"size":47,"text":"While none of the retailers in the neighbourhood markets kept records of sales, at least 13% had an agreement with the clients. These agreements have been reported as important in planning inventories and sales in order to maximize profits(Saraiya et al., 2013) in a supply chain system. "}]},{"head":"Service Provided to Clients by Neighbourhood Retailers","index":48,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":63,"text":"Again, a large percentage of the retailers (~70%) did not provide any service beyond selling to their clients (Figure 14). However, among those who did, the most popular service provided was volume discount (41%) and price discounts (36%). The least service offered by the retailers was in the aspect of special sorting; another indication of low value addition in the agricultural commodity markets. "}]},{"head":"Quality Complaints from Clients to Retailers in Neighbourhood Markets","index":49,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":73,"text":"Similar to findings in the markets, quality complaints in the neighborhood retailing systems received from clients was low (14%) (Table 10). The most important complaint seems to be related to firmness of the commodity (Figure 15); an indication of freshness. This again was especially relevant to the fruit retailers with 12.8% response to this issue. The most important complaints made to vegetable retailers was with respect to the colour of the vegetables (8.6%). "}]},{"head":"Assets Outlay of Neighbourhood Fruit and Vegetable Retailers","index":50,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":34,"text":"Physical and productive assets in fruits and vegetable retailing in Neighbourhood markets are examined in this section. Specifically, results are presented on location of enterprise, types of assets and market values of these assets. "}]},{"head":"Location of Fruit and Vegetable Retailers","index":51,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":94,"text":"The types of sales location for neighbourhood retailers were more limited than was obtained in the main markets (Figure 16). Location characteristics of fruits and vegetable retailers show that most neighbourhood retailers had some form of stall for their enterprise(40%), followed by those who used their home premises for their businesses (26%), while the use of permanent tables was found among 24% of the retailers. Fruit retailers were more likely to have stalls(~59%) than vegetable retailers (~40%); while selling in home premises was a higher likelihood for vegetable retailers (27%) than fruit retailers (20.5%)."}]},{"head":"Figure 16: Percentage Distribution of Retailers by Location","index":52,"paragraphs":[]},{"head":"Types and Value of Assets owned by Neighbourhood Retailers","index":53,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":80,"text":"The most common assets owned (Table 11) by the retailers were display items (90.5%), benches/stools(80%), phones (75%) and can baskets (70%). Lamps and stores were owned by 54% and 52%, respectively. High valued assets such as refrigerator and means of transportation (Motorcycle) were reported by only 2.3% and 1.2% of the retailers. This again speaks to the preponderance of low-level resource, and low technology agricultural commodity marketing in Nigeria, with consequences for economies of scale, standardization, and opportunity for expansion."},{"index":2,"size":22,"text":"On average, these assets were valued at N11, 370 across fruit and vegetable retailers. Specifically, fruit retailers had higher assets value at "}]},{"head":"Business Costs and Profit Outlay among Neighbourhood Retailers","index":54,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":30,"text":"In this section, profitability of the retailers across product categories in neighbourhood fruit and vegetable retailing is examined, with emphasis on business costs, revenues, and estimated profitability of the system."}]},{"head":"Labour Use in Fruit and Vegetable Retailing in Neighbourhood Markets","index":55,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":119,"text":"The results show that neighborhood retailers did not use hired labour in their activities(Table 12), but as in main markets, relied more on family for retail support, as at least 2 family members worked in the retail business daily. This suggests that neighbourhood retailing is more of a home based, sole ownership business (recall that it is 100% owned by respondents-Table 7). About 26% of these retailers had family members who also traded in fruits and vegetables; with the least being among VARF retailers (7%) and the highest among DGLV (19%). This may imply that vegetable retailing is easier than fruit retailing in terms of capital outlay (recall assets value) and may thus eases entry into the retailing space."}]},{"head":"Business Costs and Returns","index":56,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":27,"text":"The total business costs-Costs of goods sold was again an addition of the cost of inventory and other variable inputs. The outlay is presented in Figure 17."},{"index":2,"size":66,"text":"Variable inputs costs reported and estimated include electricity, fuel for generators, taxes, water, association fees, telephone, pest-control, and other miscellaneous expenses. Labour cost could not be included in the neighbourhood retailers' costs structure, since there was no paid labour use within the system. The estimated weekly business cost was therefore given at N516.49; distributed across DGLV, VARF, OF, OV retailers as N549.26, N527.06, N605.63 and N565.06."},{"index":3,"size":51,"text":"Inventory costs was estimated as the cost of good purchased for sale within the week. This accounted for N 4135.54 for all retailers. There was a higher cost of inventory among fruit retailers at N4536.41 (VARF; N5724.74 and OF; N3997.78) than with vegetable retailers at N4131.41 (DGLV; N3845 and OV; N3997.78)."},{"index":4,"size":95,"text":"The total cost of goods sold was therefore estimated as N4514.41; across DGLV, VARF, OF and OV as N4292.47, N6252.37, N4468.5 and N4997.37. Again, fruit retailing had the higher business cost outlay cumulatively (N5024.13) vegetable retailing (N4514.41). The revenue was estimated as the quantity of commodities sold multiplied by its unit price. The overall average weekly revenue was estimated at N 2136.62, with the highest revenue coming from fruit retail at N2172.47 (VARF and OF being N2840.61 and N1949.03, respectively). Vegetable retailers on the other hand had weekly revenue of N2128.51(DGLV; N1887.48 and OV; N2036.01)."},{"index":5,"size":45,"text":"As with market fruit and vegetable vendors, it is clear that neighborhood vendors are unable to operate profitably. Losses incurred per Kg of volume sold was estimated at N132.25 for the overall sample, with fruit and vegetable retailers incurring N78.54 and N134.68, respectively (table 12)."},{"index":6,"size":86,"text":"It is again interesting to note that there was a general perception of profit making among the retailers across all product types in the neighbourhood system just as in the main markets. Self-reported profit was N 591.83 per week; with fruit retailers reporting higher profit of N620.86 versus N573.29, reported by vegetable retailers. This information, when combined with the levels of record keeping reported by vendors reveals a major gap in capacity among vendors that may inhibit their ability to conduct business on a larger scale. "}]},{"head":"DIFFERENCES IN FRUIT AND VEGETABLE RETAILING ACROSS MARKET TYPES","index":57,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":38,"text":"Are there differences in the various dimensions of fruit and vegetable retailing across the market types? This section explores the characteristics of fruit and vegetable retail across the main types of markets in the study (see Figure 2)."}]},{"head":"Functional Status of Retailers across Market Types","index":58,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":17,"text":"We discuss functional status of retailers in Table 13, including historical outlays of inventory purchase and sales."},{"index":2,"size":42,"text":"While 94% of the retailers in Ojoo market sell their own produce, 85.7% of those in Moniya do the same. In the neighbourhood market, up to 83% sell their own produce while only 50% of them do so in Abaeja, neighbourhood market. "}]},{"head":"Historical Record of Fruit and Vegetable Retailing across Market Types","index":59,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":92,"text":"It is intuitive to expect that the main market would have higher purchase and sales volumes than the neighborhood vendors. However, our results show that purchase of inventory was higher among the neighborhood vendors than the main markets; but sales were higher in the main markets (figure 18). This may not be entirely strange as neighbourhood retailers are the main purchasers in the main markets, where they purchase inventory (goods to be sold). However, purchases made by retailers of the main markets are most likely for consumption, rather than for a re-sale."},{"index":2,"size":55,"text":"Results again show higher inventory purchase in the past 5 years when compared to the current period. Main market estimation showed inventory purchase in high season of 182kg for the 5-year recall and 156.34kg in the current period. Low season purchase was estimated at 84.16kg and 81.48kg for the 5-year recall and current period, respectively. "}]},{"head":"Retailers and Supplier Relations across Market types.","index":60,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":3,"text":"In Table 14 "}]},{"head":"Origin of Suppliers across Markets","index":61,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":104,"text":"Among the retailers who cropped fruits and vegetables, our survey showed that about 93% and 67% of those in the main markets and neighbourhood markets, respectively sold their own products (Figure 19). However, the main origin of supplies was directly from farmers, rural brokers, and wholesalers. Other were from Agribusinesses and importers. The main supply origin in both market type was directly from farmers, as reported by 73% and 86% of main market and neighbourhood market retailers, respectively, followed by wholesalers and rural brokers. While importers formed a very small proportion of supply for main markets, neighbourhood retailers do not purchase from this source."},{"index":2,"size":7,"text":"Figure 19: Major Suppliers across Market Types"},{"index":3,"size":31,"text":"On the average, retailers in the main market had more suppliers (~47) than those in neighbourhood markets (45). Regular suppliers were 13 and 14 in main markets and neighbourhood markets, respectively."}]},{"head":"Transactional Characteristics in Retailer-Supplier Nexus","index":62,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":41,"text":"We found that a higher percentage of neighbourhood retailers (37.7%) bought sorted products when compared to 31% from the main markets (Table 14). This transactional characteristic was found more in Moniya (33%) and Abaeja (39%) in the two respective market types."},{"index":2,"size":94,"text":"As reported across product types, retailers who kept records or had a contractual agreement with suppliers were not common. Our results found that just about 2% of main market and <4% of the retailers in the neighbourhood market kept records of purchase. With respect to purchase agreement with suppliers, at least 16% of retailers in the main market had such agreement; while only about 4% of neighbourhood retailers had it. This implies that the larger market had a higher level of organization than the neighbourhood market; thus, agreements are germane in the market system."}]},{"head":"Services Provided to and Received from Suppliers across Market Types","index":63,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":56,"text":"We found that retailers in the main markets were able to provide a wider array of services to their suppliers including advancement(11.11%), inputs(1.67%), harvest (1.67%), own transport (27.22%) and other forms of transportation arrangements (3.3%). On the other hand, neighborhood retailers were only able to provide own transport (22%) and other forms of transportation arrangements (10.5%)."},{"index":2,"size":97,"text":"Our analysis shows that 65% and 86% of retailers in the main markets and neighbourhoods, respectively did into receive any service from suppliers (Figure 20). The main service received from suppliers in the main markets were Packaging (19%) and delivery of commodities in stalls (16.7%). Others include credit sales (11%) and sorting (3%). Neighbourhood retailers followed similar patterns with packaging and delivery in stall reported by 17% and 3% respectively. Sorting and credit sales were received by a mere 1% of the neighbourhood retailers. It is however surprising that although Abaeja has a higher volume of inventory "}]},{"head":"Quality Complaints from Retailers to Suppliers","index":64,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":107,"text":"In this survey, less than 40% of the retailers made a quality complaint to their suppliers (38% in main market and 36% in neighbourhood markets). Among those who had a complaint, the results show that the main issue was related to rotten produce, as reported by 13% of main market retailers and 12% of neighbourhood market retailers. Other quality complaints in the main markets were in regard to firmness(8%), colour (8%) and use of unstandardized boxes (7%). While neighbourhood retailers did not report any complaint with respect to dirtiness and variety, it was reported by at least 1% and 2%, respectively among retailers in the main markets."}]},{"head":"Retailer and Client/Buyer Relationship across Market Types","index":65,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":14,"text":"Retailer and client relationships across market types are presented in this section (Table 15)."}]},{"head":"Current Weekly Sales across Market Types","index":66,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":73,"text":"Weekly sales volume across market type was estimated at 358kg valued at N73.46/kg in the main markets while it was 89.61kg at N78.79/kg in neighbourhood markets. The lead markets with respect to sales in the main markets and neighbourhood markets, respectively were maintained at Moniya (441.5kg at N46.30/kg) and Abaeja (93.38kg at N 86.50/kg). Retail sales in Ojoo market was estimated at 309.77kg valued at N80.68/kg; while Bagadaje retailers sold N82.86kg at 65/kg"}]},{"head":"Main Clients/Buyers","index":67,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":113,"text":"Again, we find that the retailers in the main markets had a wider range of clients than the neighborhood retailers. The results show that a larger proportion of sales was to direct consumers in both markets. However, neighbourhood retailers (~97%) sold more to consumers than market retailers (76%). The other major clients of retailers in the main markets in order of importance were traditional retailers (28.35%),street/sidewalk restaurants (19%) and Ambulant vendors (14%). In the neighbourhood markets, the other major clients were Ambulant vendors (8%) and traditional retailers (7%). On the average, main market retailers served 1741 clients (Moniya; 1326 and Ojoo-1990); while neighbourhood retailers sold to 1256 customers (Abaeja; 1261 and Bagadaje; 1246)."}]},{"head":"Transactional Characteristics","index":68,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":84,"text":"Retailers in Neighbourhood markets probably have a more personal relationship with their customers, since they are the final stage in the value chain before final consumers. This reflects in the type of market structure in such markets (Figure 20). In view of this, we find that while 51% of neighbourhood retailers sold sorted products, only 35% of retailers in the main markets did so. In reality, sorted products attract more patronage and monetary premium, which are important for the going concern of neighbourhood markets."},{"index":2,"size":52,"text":"While only 3% of retailers in the main market kept records of sale, there was no report of a sales record among neighbourhood retailers. Furthermore, up to 14% of retailers in the neighbourhood markets had an agreement with their clients, while 13% of retailers in the main market reported doing the same. "}]},{"head":"Services provided to Clients","index":69,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":97,"text":"The main service provided (Table 15) to clients in the main markets were volume discount (37%), price discount (36%), and packaging (20%). Credit sales and special forms of sorting were reported as services by 10% and 5% of the main market retailers. Similar services were provided by neighborhood retailers in the same order of importance so that volume discount, price discount, packaging, credit sales and special sorting were reported by 41%, 36%, 16%, 11.6% and 3%, respectively. The high proportion of retailers who gave volume and price discounts reflects the importance of bargaining in agricultural commodity markets."}]},{"head":"Quality Complaints by Clients","index":70,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":94,"text":"Although only 14% of the retailers in the main markets and neighbourhood markets reported a quality complaint, there were differences in occurrence of these complaints across specific quality issues and market types (See Figure 21). We found that the most limiting quality issues was related to color (9%), firmness (7%) and rottenness (6%) in the main market. However, the order of complaints was firmness (12%), colour (8%) and size (5%) in the neighbourhood markets, respectively. Others include Dirty products and variety issues did not seem to be a major complaint across the market types."},{"index":2,"size":93,"text":"Ojoo (main market) and Bagadaje (neighbourhood market) seemed to report higher occurrences of these complaints. Neighborhood vendors operate more independently, and due to relationships with consumers are more motivated to provide what their clients want. Market typology showed differences in location of retailers in this study (Table 16). Our results show that retailers in the main market were more likely to sell on Road display (65%), followed by the use of Permanent tables within the market (36%), market stalls/shop (7%). Transaction in homes, as hawkers and with wheelbarrows were less likely at 1%."}]},{"head":"Asset Outlay of Retailers across Market Types","index":71,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":39,"text":"In the neighbourhood , stalls along main neighborhood roads were the most prominent (41%), followed by sales in home premises (25%) and permanent tables (24%). The use of road display was found among only 9% of the neighbourhood retailers. "}]},{"head":"Physical Asset Ownership across Market Types","index":72,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":43,"text":"The most important asset (Table 17)owned by the retailers in both markets are display items as reported by >90% of the retailers. In the main markets, other important assets include benches (79%), phone (8%), cane basket (76%), store (54%) and commercial umbrella (46%)."},{"index":2,"size":56,"text":"In the neighbourhood market, on the other hand, the most relevant assets aside display items were benches (80%), phones(76%), cane basket (57%), lamp (55%) and store (52%). These assets reflect the needs of retailers usually within short distances from the home (low proportion with commercial umbrella); and the likelihood of selling late into the evening (lamps)."},{"index":3,"size":22,"text":"The types and values of assets are indication of a low-capital base and hence low technology retail enterprise across the market types. "}]},{"head":"Business Costs and Revenue Streams across Market Types","index":73,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":51,"text":"Our analysis reveals that while the main markets reported only one (1) paid labour, there were no paid labour in the neighbourhood markets. This indicates the small scale at which neighbourhood vendors operate. However, family labour use shows that at least 2 persons from the family works in the retailing enterprise."},{"index":2,"size":21,"text":"Weekly labour expense in the main market was estimated at N1232.51; with Ojoo retailers paying less (N1063.46) than Moniya retailers (N1683.33)."},{"index":3,"size":76,"text":"Weekly business cost outlay was estimated as the sum of all variable costs in the retail enterprise. This includes the cost of electricity, fuel, association fees, transportation, labour, rent, water bills and others. In the main market, weekly business cost was estimated at N921.41; across Moniya and Ojoo markets at N939.99 and N909.55, respectively. Expectedly, retailers in the neigbourhood markets had lower business expenses at N516.49; with Abaeja and Bagadaje's expenses as N522.26 and N505.69, respectively."},{"index":4,"size":73,"text":"Cost on inventory, which is the cost of goods purchased for sale for the week was estimated at N5911.77 in the main markets. Moniya market had the higher purchase cost estimate (N6030.98), while retailers in Ojoo purchased an average of N5835.68 in the recall week. In the neighborhood markets, inventory purchase was estimated at N4135.54 for the overall average. However, retailers in Bagadaje had higher inventory value (N4312.14) than those in Abaeja (N4045.64)"},{"index":5,"size":59,"text":"Cost of goods sold which was an addition of weekly business costs and weekly inventory purchase showed that Moniya market had the higher cost outlay (N5997.36) among the main markets, with Ojoo retailers averaging cost of goods sold of N5803. 15. In the neighbourhood markets, Bagadaje had the highest cost outlay (N4745.59); while Abaeja recorded weekly cost of N4393.06."},{"index":6,"size":52,"text":"Revenue streams in fruits and vegetable retailing across market types showed that main markets had almost double the revenues of neighbourhood markets. Weekly revenue estimated for main market was N4964.85, with Moniya and Ojoo markets receiving N5064.96; and N4900.94. The neighbourhood markets recorded revenue of N2136.62; across Abaeja (N2017.24) and Bagadaje (N2350.69)."},{"index":7,"size":97,"text":"In view of the foregoing, we find that there was no profitable fruit and vegetable enterprises in any of the markets surveyed. It is therefore is interesting that the retailers all report some form of profit from their own recall. This could be attributed to the poor literacy levels and record keeping culture of retailers. NOTE: * these vegetables do not have standard measures. Therefore, acceptable measure of BAGCO SACK (for water leaf) and a CONGO (for wet bitter leaf) were used to ascertain the weights and corresponding prices of the largest measures sold in the markets."},{"index":8,"size":35,"text":"#: owo is made up of a number of pieces of the fruit/vegetable sold as a measure. For oranges, the \"owo\" depends on the sizes. An average of the sizes was taken for the markets."},{"index":9,"size":31,"text":"In the case of onion, a standard \"owo\" is made up of 42 pieces. However, the weight of each piece will determine the price. Hence, small owo, medium owo, large owo."}]},{"head":"FVN FRESH FRUIT & VEGETABLE RETAILER SURVEY","index":74,"paragraphs":[{"index":1,"size":93,"text":"Informed consent and confidentiality of interviews Good morning/afternoon, Mr/Mrs _______. My name is ______ and I am here to administer a survey on behalf of______. Your business is one of the few selected. The purpose of this survey is to gather information about fruit and vegetable consumption. The interview will take about ____. All the information we obtain will remain strictly confidential and your answers and name will never be revealed. Also you are not obliged to answer question you do not want to, and you may stop the interview at any time."},{"index":2,"size":53,"text":"The objective of this study is to assess the dynamics related to fruit and vegetable markets and its consumption. This is not to evaluate or criticize you, so please do not feel pressured to give a specific response and do not feel shy if you do not know the answer to a question. "}]}],"figures":[{"text":"Figure 1 : Figure 1: Map of Study sites "},{"text":"Figure 2 : Figure 2: Distribution of Markets in MLA survey "},{"text":"Figure 3 : Figure 3: Composition of Fruit and Vegetable Categorisation "},{"text":"Figure 4 : Figure 4: Components of Complaints made by Retailers to Suppliers "},{"text":"Figure 7 : Figure 7: Total Variable Cost and Revenue Streams across Fruit and Vegetable Product Categories "},{"text":"Figure 8 : Figure 8: Percentage Distribution of Retailers in the Focal Neighborhoods by Product Categories "},{"text":"Figure 9 : Figure 9: Historical Outlay of Inventory Purchase across Neighbourhood retailers "},{"text":"Figure 10 : Figure 10: Minimum and Maximum Weekly Sales in Neighbourhood Retailing "},{"text":"Figure 11 : Figure 11: Origin of Supplies to Neighbourhood Fruit and Vegetable Retailers "},{"text":"Figure 12 : Figure 12: Retailer Complaints to Suppliers "},{"text":"Figure 13 : Figure 13: Percentage Distribution of Main Clients of Neighbourhood Fruit and Vegetable Retailers "},{"text":"Figure 14 : Figure 14: Percentage Distribution of Neighbourhood Retailers Across Service Provided to Clients "},{"text":"Figure 15 : Figure 15: Percentage Distribution of Neighbourhood Retailers by Quality Complaints made by Clients "},{"text":"Figure 17 : Figure 17:Weekly Costs of Business in Neighbourhood retailing "},{"text":" purchase and sale, retailers in this neighborhood do not receive any form of service related to sorting or credit sales. "},{"text":"Figure 20 : Figure 20: Services Received from Suppliers across Market Types. "},{"text":"Figure 21 : Figure 21: Client Quality Complaint across Market Types. "},{"text":" "},{"text":" "},{"text":"Table 1 : Socioeconomic Characteristics of Retailers VARIABLE DGLF(N=93) VARF(N=66) OF (N=78) OV (N=69) All fruits All Veggies ALL (N=180) VARIABLEDGLF(N=93)VARF(N=66)OF (N=78)OV (N=69)All fruitsAll VeggiesALL (N=180) (N=96) (N=132) (N=96)(N=132) AGE (years)* 50.01(13.21) 46.95(11.77) 48.35(12.78) 45.70(13.34) 47.46(12.46) 48.61(13.42) 48.22(13.0) AGE (years)* 50.01(13.21)46.95(11.77)48.35(12.78)45.70(13.34)47.46(12.46)48.61(13.42)48.22(13.0) SEX SEX Male 4(4.30) 2(3.03) 4(5.13) 1(1.45) 4(4.17) 4(3.03) 6(3.33) Male4(4.30)2(3.03)4(5.13)1(1.45)4(4.17)4(3.03)6(3.33) Female 89(95.70) 64(96.97) 74(94.87) 68(98.55) 92(95.83) 128(96.97) 174(96.67) Female89(95.70)64(96.97)74(94.87)68(98.55)92(95.83)128(96.97)174(96.67) OWNER(% 93(100) 65(98.48) 77(98.72) 67(97.10) 94(97.92) 130(98.48) 177(98.33) OWNER(%93(100)65(98.48)77(98.72)67(97.10)94(97.92)130(98.48)177(98.33) Yes) Yes) Sex of owner Sex of owner Male 4(4.30) 2(3.08) 4(5.19) 1(1.49) 4(4.26) 4(3.08) 6(3.39) Male4(4.30)2(3.08)4(5.19)1(1.49)4(4.26)4(3.08)6(3.39) Female 89(95.70) 63(96.92) 73(94.81) 66(98.51) 90(95.74) 126(96.92) 171(96.61) Female89(95.70)63(96.92)73(94.81)66(98.51)90(95.74)126(96.92)171(96.61) Respondent 90(96.77) 64(96.67) 78(100) 68(98.55) 94(97.92) 128(96.97) 176(97.76) Respondent90(96.77)64(96.67)78(100)68(98.55)94(97.92)128(96.97)176(97.76) funds funds SEX of SEX of funder funder "},{"text":" Table2). While current weekly volume purchased in high and low season were estimated at 156.34kg and 81.48kg, respectively; the volume 5 years ago was 182.44kg and 84.16kg for high and low seasons, respectively. This suggests a downward trend in merchandise purchase by the retailers, a situation not unconnected to the general downturn in the Nigerian economy(Raaijmakers et al, 2019). Whereas the maximum weekly volume sold of fruits and vegetables was given as 266.27kg; while the minimum volume sold was 129.61kg. Product type disaggregation shows that weekly volume sold in high and low seasons were 168.96kg and Product type disaggregation shows that weekly volume sold in high and low seasons were 168.96kg and 80.79kg for fruit vendors; and 145.13kg and 78.17kg for all vegetable vendors, respectively. For vendors of 80.79kg for fruit vendors; and 145.13kg and 78.17kg for all vegetable vendors, respectively. For vendors of "},{"text":"Table 2 : Functional Status of Retailers "},{"text":"Table 3 : Retailer and Supplier Relationship in Fruit and Vegetable Markets in Nigeria DGLV(74) VARF OF OV All fruit All veggies All DGLV(74)VARFOFOVAll fruitAll veggiesAll Observations Observations Weekly volume NOW (KGS) 236.51 409.75 385.21 273.05 365.55 238.44 280.85 Weekly volume NOW (KGS)236.51409.75385.21273.05365.55238.44280.85 Price per KG (N) 56.89 65.61 69.41 110.15 66.72 85.75 74.98 Price per KG (N)56.8965.6169.41110.1566.7285.7574.98 Origin of supply (%) Origin of supply (%) Own production(n=41) 34(100) 9(100) 10(83.33) 12(92.31) 14(87.50) 37(97.37) 38(92.68) Own production(n=41)34(100)9(100)10(83.33)12(92.31)14(87.50)37(97.37)38(92.68) Directly from farmers(n=180) 67(72.04) 52(78.79) 64(82.05) 52(75.36) 78(81.25) 95(71.97) 132(73.33) Directly from farmers(n=180)67(72.04)52(78.79)64(82.05)52(75.36)78(81.25)95(71.97)132(73.33) Rural Broker(n=180) 7(7.53) 9(13.64) 12(15.38) 8(11.59) 13(13.54) 10(7.59) 20(11.11) Rural Broker(n=180)7(7.53)9(13.64)12(15.38)8(11.59)13(13.54)10(7.59)20(11.11) Wholesaler(n=180) 17(18.28) 9(13.64) 13(16.67) 26(37.68) 14(14.58) 32(24.24) 37(20.56 Wholesaler(n=180)17(18.28)9(13.64)13(16.67)26(37.68)14(14.58)32(24.24)37(20.56 Agribusiness(n=180) 0.0 0.0 1(1.28) 0.0 1(1.04) 0.0 1(0.56) Agribusiness(n=180)0.00.01(1.28)0.01(1.04)0.01(0.56) Importer(n=180) 1(1.08) 1(1.52) 0.0 0.0 1(1.04) 1(0.76) 2(1.11) Importer(n=180)1(1.08)1(1.52)0.00.01(1.04)1(0.76)2(1.11) Transaction characteristics Transaction characteristics Share of retailers who buy product sorted (%), N=159 23(31.08) 21(35.69) 25(33.78) 20(32.26) 30(33.71) 32(28.83) 49(30.82) Share of retailers who buy product sorted (%), N=15923(31.08)21(35.69)25(33.78)20(32.26)30(33.71)32(28.83)49(30.82) Share of retailers who keep written records of purchase (%), N=3 1(1.35) 1(1.69) 1(1.35) 0.0 2(2.25) 1(0.90) 3(1.89) Share of retailers who keep written records of purchase (%), N=31(1.35)1(1.69)1(1.35)0.02(2.25)1(0.90)3(1.89) Share of retailers who have any agreement with suppliers (%), N=159 17(22.97) 7(11.86) 8(10.81) 8(12.90) 11(12.36) 21(18.92) 23(14.47) Share of retailers who have any agreement with suppliers (%), N=15917(22.97)7(11.86)8(10.81)8(12.90)11(12.36)21(18.92)23(14.47) Number of suppliers (frequency) 39.4 59.9 66.2 45.0 60.9 40.0 46.5 Number of suppliers (frequency)39.459.966.245.060.940.046.5 Number of regular suppliers(frequency) 11.7 18.6 16.9 11.5 15.7 11.0 12.8 Number of regular suppliers(frequency)11.718.616.911.515.711.012.8 Services PROVIDED to suppliers (%) Services PROVIDED to suppliers (%) No service provided 36(38.71) 42(63.64) 47(60.26) 37(53.62) 60(62.50) 61(46.21) 96(53.33) No service provided36(38.71)42(63.64)47(60.26)37(53.62)60(62.50)61(46.21)96(53.33) Advancement of money 13(13.98) 7(10.61) 11(14.10) 6(8.70) 11(11.46) 15(11.36) 20(11.11) Advancement of money13(13.98)7(10.61)11(14.10)6(8.70)11(11.46)15(11.36)20(11.11) Inputs 3(3.23) 1(1.52) (1(1.28) 1(1.45) 1(1.04) 3(2.27) 3(1.67) Inputs3(3.23)1(1.52)(1(1.28)1(1.45)1(1.04)3(2.27)3(1.67) Harvests 2(2.15) 1(1.52) 2(2.56) 0 2(2.08) 2(1.52) 3(1.67) Harvests2(2.15)1(1.52)2(2.56)02(2.08)2(1.52)3(1.67) Own transport 26(27.96) 13(19.70) 1(1.28) 18(26.09) 22(22.92) 37(28.03) 49(27.22) Own transport26(27.96)13(19.70)1(1.28)18(26.09)22(22.92)37(28.03)49(27.22) Transportation arrangements 5(5.38) 2(3.03) 3(3.85) 2(2.90) 3(3.13) 6(4.55) 6(3.33) Transportation arrangements5(5.38)2(3.03)3(3.85)2(2.90)3(3.13)6(4.55)6(3.33) Services RECEIVED by suppliers (%) Services RECEIVED by suppliers (%) No service received 50(53.76) 47(71.21) 62(79.49) 48(69.57) 73(76.04) 79(59.85) 117(65.00) No service received50(53.76)47(71.21)62(79.49)48(69.57)73(76.04)79(59.85)117(65.00) "},{"text":"Share of retailers who received complaints from suppliers over the past 12 months (%) Yes 31(33.33) 29(43.94) 35(44.87) 30(43.48) 43(44.79) 47(35.61) 69(38.33) Yes31(33.33)29(43.94)35(44.87)30(43.48)43(44.79)47(35.61)69(38.33) No 62(66.67) 37(56.06) 43(55.13) 39(56.52) 53(55.21) 85(64.39) 111(61.67) No62(66.67)37(56.06)43(55.13)39(56.52)53(55.21)85(64.39)111(61.67) Reason of complaint (%) Reason of complaint (%) Dirty product 2(2.15) 0 1(1.28) 1(1.45) 1(1.04) 2(1.52) 2(1.11) Dirty product2(2.15)01(1.28)1(1.45)1(1.04)2(1.52)2(1.11) Variety 1(1.08) 2(3.03) 4(5.13) 1(1.45) 4(4.17) 2(1.52) 4(2.22) Variety1(1.08)2(3.03)4(5.13)1(1.45)4(4.17)2(1.52)4(2.22) Color 10(10.75) 4(6.06) 7(8.97) 5(7.25) 7(7.29) 11(8.33) 14(7.78) Color10(10.75)4(6.06)7(8.97)5(7.25)7(7.29)11(8.33)14(7.78) Size 2(2.15) 5(7.58) 6(7.69) 1(1.45) 6(6.25) 3(2.27) 8(4.44) Size2(2.15)5(7.58)6(7.69)1(1.45)6(6.25)3(2.27)8(4.44) Firmness 5(5.38) 8(12.12) 5(6.41) 9(13.04) 9(9.38) 10(7.58) 15(8.33) Firmness5(5.38)8(12.12)5(6.41)9(13.04)9(9.38)10(7.58)15(8.33) Lack of volume in the box 5(5.38) 0 1(1.28) 1(1.45) 6(6.25) 9(6.82) 13(7.22) Lack of volume in the box5(5.38)01(1.28)1(1.45)6(6.25)9(6.82)13(7.22) Rottenness 8(8.60) 12(18.18) 11(14.10) 12(17.39) 15(15.63) 15(11.36) 23(12.78) Rottenness8(8.60)12(18.18)11(14.10)12(17.39)15(15.63)15(11.36)23(12.78) Bruised 0 4(6.06) 4(5.13) 0 6(6.25) 0 6(3.33) Bruised04(6.06)4(5.13)06(6.25)06(3.33) Other Other "},{"text":" Table 4 shows that current sales was quantified at 358.77kg per week at N73.46/kg. It is intuitive that sales may exceed goods purchase because of inventory from previous purchase. The largest volume was sold by vegetable retailers at 396.29kg at N79.83/kg, while fruit retailers sold an The largest volume was sold by vegetable retailers at 396.29kg at N79.83/kg, while fruit retailers sold an average on 364.2kg at N57.61/kg. across the product categories, DGLV, VARF, OF and OV retailers sold average on 364.2kg at N57.61/kg. across the product categories, DGLV, VARF, OF and OV retailers sold current average volume of 473.4kg, 424.8kg, 379.3kg and 364.2kg,respectively. current average volume of 473.4kg, 424.8kg, 379.3kg and 364.2kg,respectively. Price per kg sold across product groups was reported at N35.95, N56.28, N58.81 and N122.82, respectively Price per kg sold across product groups was reported at N35.95, N56.28, N58.81 and N122.82, respectively for DGLV, VARF, OF and OV. for DGLV, VARF, OF and OV. "},{"text":"Table 4 : Retailer-Buyer Nexus in Nigerian Fruits and Vegetables Market DGLV VARF OF Other Vegetables all fruits all veggies All DGLVVARFOFOther Vegetablesall fruitsall veggiesAll Observations 93 66 78 180 Observations936678180 Weekly volume NOW (KGS) 473.4 424.8 379.3 211.67 364.2 396.29 358.77 Weekly volume NOW (KGS)473.4424.8379.3211.67364.2396.29358.77 Price per KG (N thousands) 35.95 56.28 58.1 122.82 57.61 79.83 73.46 Price per KG (N thousands)35.9556.2858.1122.8257.6179.8373.46 "},{"text":"Other Share of retailers who received complaints from buyers over the past 12 months (%) (n=176) Yes 17(18.68) 5(7.69) 70(92.11) 15(22.39) 7(7.45) 24(18.60) 26(14.77) Yes17(18.68)5(7.69)70(92.11)15(22.39)7(7.45)24(18.60)26(14.77) No 74(81.32) 60(92.31) 6(7.89) 52(77.61) 87(92.55) 105(81.40) 150(85.23) No74(81.32) 60(92.31)6(7.89)52(77.61)87(92.55)105(81.40) 150(85.23) Reason of complaint (%) Reason of complaint (%) Dirty product 1(1.08) 0 0 2(2.90) 0 2(1.52) 2(1.11) Dirty product1(1.08)002(2.90)02(1.52)2(1.11) Variety 1(1.08) 0 0 2(2.90) 0 2(1.52) 2(1.11) Variety1(1.08)002(2.90)02(1.52)2(1.11) Color 13(13.98) 5(7.58) 7(7.69) 8(11.59) 7(7.29) 15(11.36) 17(9.44) Color13(13.98)5(7.58)7(7.69)8(11.59)7(7.29)15(11.36)17(9.44) Size 0 4(6.06) 3(3.85) 5(7.25) 4(4.17) 5(3.79) 8(4.44) Size04(6.06)3(3.85)5(7.25)4(4.17)5(3.79)8(4.44) Firmness 7(7.53) 5(7.58) 6(7.69) 4(5.80) 7(7.29) 8(6.06) 12(6.67) Firmness7(7.53)5(7.58)6(7.69)4(5.80)7(7.29)8(6.06)12(6.67) Lack of volume in the box 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lack of volume in the box0000000 Deterioration/rottenness 5(5.38) 7(10.61) 5(6.41) 6(8.70) 7(7.29) 9(6.82) 11(6.11) Deterioration/rottenness5(5.38)7(10.61)5(6.41)6(8.70)7(7.29)9(6.82)11(6.11) Bruised 4(4.30) 2(3.03) 2(2.56) 4(5.80) 3(3.13) 6(4.55) 6(3.33) Bruised4(4.30)2(3.03)2(2.56)4(5.80)3(3.13)6(4.55)6(3.33) Other 3(3.23) 1(1.52) 1(1.28) 3(4.35) 1(1.04) 4(3.03) 4(2.22) Other3(3.23)1(1.52)1(1.28)3(4.35)1(1.04)4(3.03)4(2.22) "},{"text":"Table 5 : Description of Assets Owned by Fruit and Vegetable Retailers in Nigeria DGLV VARF OF Other Vegetables all fruits all veggies All Observations 180 Location of stall/shop of retailers In home premises 2(2.15) 0 0 2(2.90) 0 2(1.52) 2(1.11) In home premises2(2.15)002(2.90)02(1.52)2(1.11) Market stall/shop 8(8.60) 4(6.06) 6(7.69) 4(5.80) 8(8.33) 9(6.82) 13(7.22) Market stall/shop8(8.60)4(6.06)6(7.69)4(5.80)8(8.33)9(6.82)13(7.22) Permanent table 13(13.98) 22(33.33) 24(30.77) 16(23.19) 28(29.17) 26(19.70) 45(25.00) Permanent table13(13.98)22(33.33)24(30.77)16(23.19)28(29.17)26(19.70)45(25.00) Roadside display 70(75.27) 39(59.09) 46(58.97) 47(68.12) 58(60.42) 95(71.97) 118(65.56) Roadside display70(75.27)39(59.09)46(58.97)47(68.12)58(60.42)95(71.97)118(65.56) Wheelbarrow(stationary) 0 0 1(1.28) 0 1(1.04) 0 1(0.56) Wheelbarrow(stationary)001(1.28)01(1.04)01(0.56) Hawker 0 1(1.52) 1(1.28) 0 1(1.04) 0 1(0.56) Hawker01(1.52)1(1.28)01(1.04)01(0.56) Cane basket 57(61.29) 60(90.91) 71(91.03) 58(84.06) 86(89.58) 93(70.45) 137(76.11) Cane basket57(61.29)60(90.91)71(91.03)58(84.06)86(89.58)93(70.45)137(76.11) Commercial Umbrella 35(38.04) 37(56.06) 46(58.97) 31(46.27) 52(54.17) 54(41.86) 82(46.33) Commercial Umbrella35(38.04)37(56.06)46(58.97)31(46.27)52(54.17)54(41.86)82(46.33) Wheelbarrow(stationary) 4(4.40) 4(6.15) 4(5.19) 2(2.94) 6(6.32) 4(3.10) 8(4.52) Wheelbarrow(stationary)4(4.40)4(6.15)4(5.19)2(2.94)6(6.32)4(3.10)8(4.52) Display items 85(91.40) 60(90.91) 71(91.03) 65(95.59 86(89.58) 123(93.89) 166(92.74) Display items85(91.40)60(90.91)71(91.03)65(95.5986(89.58)123(93.89)166(92.74) Motorcycle 2(2.15) 2(3.03) 1(1.28) 1(1.47) 2(2.08) 3(2.29) 3(1.68) Motorcycle2(2.15)2(3.03)1(1.28)1(1.47)2(2.08)3(2.29)3(1.68) Tricycle 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Tricycle0000000 Micra(small vehicle) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Micra(small vehicle)0000000 Bus 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Bus0000000 "},{"text":"Cost of Goods Sold in Fruit and Vegetable Retailing in Nigeria Revenue streams in Fruit and Vegetable Retailing Figure 6: Figure 6: "},{"text":"Table 6 : Business Costs and Profit Outlay of Fruit and Vegetable Retailers in Nigeria DGLV VARF OF OV All fruits All vegetables All DGLVVARFOFOVAll fruitsAll vegetablesAll Observations 180 Observations180 Business labor Business labor Permanent workers 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Permanent workers0000000 Daily workers 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Daily workers1111111 Other workers 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other workers0000000 No. family member working in the shop/stall 2.51 2.26 2.16 2.36 2.19 2.4 2.3 No. family member working in the shop/stall2.512.262.162.362.192.42.3 Share of traders having family members a trader% 30(32.26) 25(37.88) 31(39.74) 24(34.78) 37(38.54) 44(33.33) 64(35.36) Share of traders having family members a trader%30(32.26) 25(37.88) 31(39.74)24(34.78)37(38.54)44(33.33)64(35.36) Business costs and other information Business costs and other information Total weekly business costs ( N ) 808.93 1118.26 1053.83 761.69 1088.89 762.59 921.41 Total weekly business costs ( N )808.931118.261053.83761.691088.89762.59921.41 Total monthly business costs ( N ) 3235.7 4473.02 4215.3 3046.77 4355.56 3050.37 3685.62 Total monthly business costs ( N )3235.74473.024215.33046.774355.563050.373685.62 weekly cost of purchase of commodities/inventory 4504.84 6606.91 6257.15 9162.48 5725.1 8082.27 5911.77 weekly cost of purchase of commodities/inventory4504.846606.916257.159162.485725.18082.275911.77 Total weekly business cost including inventory 4277.91 6739.97 6889.27 8745.43 6398.61 5878.67 5878.82 Total weekly business cost including inventory4277.916739.976889.278745.436398.615878.675878.82 Weekly Revenue 4093.6 5365.08 5379.87 7088.89 5155.73 5198.78 4964.85 Weekly Revenue4093.65365.085379.877088.895155.735198.784964.85 Profit per KG (N thousands) -52.8 -116.74 -116.48 -98.61 -116.93 -82.89 -94.61 Profit per KG (N thousands)-52.8-116.74-116.48-98.61-116.93-82.89-94.61 Profit per KG (N thousands):SELF REPORTED 1205.41 931.92 1153.47 1036.64 1104.16 1130.79 1200.46 Profit per KG (N thousands):SELF REPORTED1205.41931.921153.471036.641104.161130.791200.46 Share of retailers who sell organic vegetables/fruits (%) 25(26.88) 13(19.70) 10(12.82) 10(14.49) 14(14.58) 28(21.21) 35(19.44) Share of retailers who sell organic vegetables/fruits (%)25(26.88) 13(19.70) 10(12.82)10(14.49)14(14.58)28(21.21)35(19.44) Mark-up for organic commodities(%) 30.6 28.27 20 39 26.25 29.46 26 Mark-up for organic commodities(%)30.628.27203926.2529.4626 Share of retailers who sell safe/clean vegetables/fruits (%) NA Share of retailers who sell safe/clean vegetables/fruits (%)NA Mark-up for safe/clean commodities(%) NA Mark-up for safe/clean commodities(%)NA "},{"text":"Table 7 : Description of Fruits and vegetable Retailers in Neighbourhood markets VARIABLE DGLF(N=62) VARF(N=19) OF (N=36) OV (N=60) All All ALL VARIABLE DGLF(N=62) VARF(N=19) OF (N=36) OV (N=60)AllAllALL Fruits(N=39) Vegetables (N=86) Fruits(N=39)Vegetables(N=86) (N=81) (N=81) Age(years)* 45.18(11.09) 45.79(8.41) 44.67(9.17) 45.67(11.05) 44.74(8.81) 45.07(11.12) 45.03(11.0) Age(years)* 45.18(11.09)45.79(8.41)44.67(9.17) 45.67(11.05) 44.74(8.81)45.07(11.12) 45.03(11.0) SEX SEX Male 1(1.61) 0 0 1(1.67) 0 1(1.23) 1(1.16) Male1(1.61)001(1.67)01(1.23)1(1.16) Female 61(98.39) 19(100) 36(100) 59(98.33) 39(100) 80(98.77) 85(98.84) Female61(98.39)19(100)36(100)59(98.33)39(100)80(98.77)85(98.84) OWNER(% 61(98.39) 19(100) 36(100) 60(100) 39(100) 80(98.77) 85(98.84) OWNER(%61(98.39)19(100)36(100)60(100)39(100)80(98.77)85(98.84) Yes) Yes) "},{"text":"Table 8 : Functional Status of Neighbourhood Retailers of Fruits and Vegetables DGLVegetables VAR Fruits other fruits Other Vegetables All fruits All vegetable All DGLVegetablesVAR Fruitsother fruitsOther VegetablesAll fruitsAll vegetableAll Observations 62 19 36 60 39 81 86 Observations62193660398186 Transaction Transaction Characteristics Characteristics Share of retailers Share of retailers who sell their own 6(75.00) 1(100) 4(57.14) 6(75.00) 4(57.14) 8(72.73) 8(66.67) who sell their own6(75.00)1(100)4(57.14)6(75.00)4(57.14)8(72.73)8(66.67) production production Purchasing Volume Purchasing Volume per season (KGS) per season (KGS) Weekly volume in high season (HS) 182.17 219.28 180.94 135.53 201.75 169.68 166.66 Weekly volume in high season (HS)182.17219.28180.94135.53201.75169.68166.66 "},{"text":"Table 9 : Relationship between Retailers and Suppliers of Neighbourhood Fruit and Vegetables Vendors 100 100 80 80 responses 60 responses60 Percentage 40 Percentage40 20 20 0 0 DGLV VARF OV OF ALL FRUITS ALL POOLED DGLVVARFOVOFALL FRUITSALLPOOLED VEGETABLES VEGETABLES Directly from farmers(n=180) Rural Broker(n=180) Wholesaler(n=180) Agrbusiness(n=180) Directly from farmers(n=180)Rural Broker(n=180)Wholesaler(n=180)Agrbusiness(n=180) Retailers and Suppliers Retailers and Suppliers DGLV(74) VARF OF Other Vegetables(62) all fruit All veggies All DGLV(74)VARFOFOther Vegetables(62)all fruitAll veggiesAll Observations Observations Weekly volume NOW (KGS) 387.31 195.46 175.76 121.73 179.8 333.51 323.41 Weekly volume NOW (KGS)387.31195.46175.76121.73179.8333.51323.41 Price per KG (N) 65.19 39.91 56.4 89.16 55.93 76.71 75.96 Price per KG (N)65.1939.9156.489.1655.9376.7175.96 Origin of supply (%) Origin of supply (%) Own production(n=8) 6(75) 1(100) 4(57.14) 6(75) 4(57.14) 8(72.73) 8(66.67) Own production(n=8)6(75)1(100)4(57.14)6(75)4(57.14)8(72.73)8(66.67) Directly from farmers(n=180) 57(91.94) 19(100) 36(100) 49(81.67) 39(100) 69(85.19) 74(86.05) Directly from farmers(n=180)57(91.94)19(100)36(100)49(81.67)39(100)69(85.19)74(86.05) Rural Broker(n=180) 5(8.06) 2(10.53) 6(16.67) 8(13.33) 6(15.38) 9(9.88) 9(10.47) Rural Broker(n=180)5(8.06)2(10.53)6(16.67)8(13.33)6(15.38)9(9.88)9(10.47) Wholesaler(n=180) 25(40.32) 7(36.84) 12(33.33) 34(56.67) 12(30.77) 38(46.91) 39(45.35) Wholesaler(n=180)25(40.32)7(36.84)12(33.33)34(56.67)12(30.77)38(46.91)39(45.35) Agribusiness(n=180) 1(1.61) 1(5.26) 0.0 1(1.67) 1(2.56) 1(1.23) 1(1.16) Agribusiness(n=180)1(1.61)1(5.26)0.01(1.67)1(2.56)1(1.23)1(1.16) Importer(n=180) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Importer(n=180)0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 Transaction characteristics Transaction characteristics Share of retailers who buy product sorted (%), N=86 22(35.48) 8(42.11) 16(44.44) 25(42.37) 17(43.59) 30(37.50) 32(37.65) Share of retailers who buy product sorted (%), N=8622(35.48)8(42.11)16(44.44)25(42.37)17(43.59)30(37.50)32(37.65) Share of retailers who keep written records of purchase (%), N=3 2(3.23) 1(5.26) 2(5.56) 3(3.39) 2(5.13) 3(3.75) 3(3.53) Share of retailers who keep written records of purchase (%), N=32(3.23)1(5.26)2(5.56)3(3.39)2(5.13)3(3.75)3(3.53) Share of retailers who have any agreement with suppliers (%), N=86 2(3.23) 0.0 1(2.78) 0.0 1(2.56) 2(2.50) 3(3.53) Share of retailers who have any agreement with suppliers (%), N=862(3.23)0.01(2.78)0.01(2.56)2(2.50)3(3.53) Number of suppliers (frequency) 52.6 43.9 42.7 41.4 43.4 47.6 45.3 Number of suppliers (frequency)52.643.942.741.443.447.645.3 Number of regular suppliers(frequency) 15.6 18.8 14.2 13.4 14.7 14.1 13.8 Number of regular suppliers(frequency)15.618.814.213.414.714.113.8 Services PROVIDED to suppliers Services PROVIDED to suppliers (%) (%) No service provided 40(64.52) 13(68.42) 24(66.67) 39(65) 27(69.23) 52(64.20) 56(65.12) No service provided40(64.52)13(68.42)24(66.67)39(65)27(69.23)52(64.20)56(65.12) Advancement of money 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Advancement of money0000000 Inputs 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Inputs0000000 Harvests 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Harvests0000000 Own transport 14(22.58) 5(26.32) 9(25.00) 13(21.67) 9(23.08) 19(23.46) 19(22.09) Own transport14(22.58)5(26.32)9(25.00)13(21.67)9(23.08)19(23.46)19(22.09) Transportation arrangements 9(14.52) 1(5.26) 2(5.56) 6(10.00) 2(5.13) 9(11.11) 9(10.47) Transportation arrangements9(14.52)1(5.26)2(5.56)6(10.00)2(5.13)9(11.11)9(10.47) Services RECEIVED by suppliers Services RECEIVED by suppliers (%) (%) No service received 54(87.10) 18(97.74) 32(88.89) 51(85.00) 35(89.74) 69(85.19) 74(86.05) No service received54(87.10)18(97.74)32(88.89)51(85.00)35(89.74)69(85.19)74(86.05) Delivery in stall 2(3.23) 1(5.26) 3(8.33) 2(3.33) 3(7.69) 3(3.70) 3(3.49) Delivery in stall2(3.23)1(5.26)3(8.33)2(3.33)3(7.69)3(3.70)3(3.49) Sorting 1(1.61) 0 2(5.56) 2(3.33) 2(5.13) 2(2.47) 2(2.33) Sorting1(1.61)02(5.56)2(3.33)2(5.13)2(2.47)2(2.33) Sales on credit 1(1.61) 0 0 1(1.67) 0 1(.23) 1(1.16) Sales on credit1(1.61)001(1.67)01(.23)1(1.16) Packaging 10(16.13) 3(15.79) 7(19.44) 11(18.33) 7(17.95) 15(18.52) 15(17.44) Packaging10(16.13)3(15.79)7(19.44)11(18.33)7(17.95)15(18.52)15(17.44) Cleaning 1(1.61) 0 1(2.78) 0 1(2.56) 1(1.23) 1(1.16) Cleaning1(1.61)01(2.78)01(2.56)1(1.23)1(1.16) "},{"text":"Table 10 : Retailer-Client Nexus in Fruits and Vegetable markets in Oyo State, Nigeria DGLV VARF OF Other Vegetables all fruits all veggies All DGLVVARFOFOther Vegetablesall fruitsall veggiesAll Observations 93 66 78 180 Observations936678180 Weekly volume NOW (KGS) 89.47 70.24 88.09 68.42 90.02 86.66 89.61 Weekly volume NOW (KGS)89.4770.2488.0968.4290.0286.6689.61 Price per KG (N thousands) 62.89 38.56 34.25 99.24 35.02 81.85 78.8 Price per KG (N thousands)62.8938.5634.2599.2435.0281.8578.8 Clients (%) Clients (%) Directly to consumers 59(95.16) 19(100) 36(100) 60(100) 39(100) 78(96.30) 83(96.51) Directly to consumers59(95.16) 19(100)36(100)60(100)39(100) 78(96.30) 83(96.51) Traditional retailer 4(6.45) 2(10.53) 3(8.33) 3(5.00) 3(7.69) 5(6.17) 6(6.98) Traditional retailer4(6.45)2(10.53)3(8.33)3(5.00)3(7.69)5(6.17)6(6.98) Ambulant Street Vendors/hawkers 5(8.06) 2(10.53) 2(5.56) 4(6.67) 3(7.69) 7(8.64) 7(8.14) Ambulant Street Vendors/hawkers5(8.06)2(10.53)2(5.56)4(6.67)3(7.69)7(8.64)7(8.14) Street/sidewalk catering/restaurants 3(4.84) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3(3.70) 3(3.49) Street/sidewalk catering/restaurants3(4.84)0.00.00.00.03(3.70)3(3.49) Neighbourhood supermarket 1(1.08) 0.0 0.0 1(1.45) 0.0 1(0.76) 1(0.56) Neighbourhood supermarket1(1.08)0.00.01(1.45)0.01(0.76)1(0.56) Restaurant 0.0 1(5.26) 1(2.78) 1(1.67) 1(2.56) 1(1.23) 1(1.16) Restaurant0.01(5.26)1(2.78)1(1.67)1(2.56)1(1.23)1(1.16) Transaction characteristics Transaction characteristics Share of retailers who sell product sorted (%) 27(43.55) 11(57.89) 21(58.33) 31(51.67) 23(58.97) 39(48.15) 44(51.16) Share of retailers who sell product sorted (%)27(43.55) 11(57.89) 21(58.33) 31(51.67) 23(58.97) 39(48.15) 44(51.16) Share of retailers who keep written records of sell (%) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Share of retailers who keep written records of sell (%)0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 Share of retailers who have any agreement with buyers (%); 10(16.33) 1(5.26) 2(5.56) 10(16.67) 3(7.69) 12(14.81) 12(13.95) Share of retailers who have any agreement with buyers (%);10(16.33)1(5.26)2(5.56)10(16.67)3(7.69)12(14.81) 12(13.95) Number of clients 1258.6 2089.3 1494.7 1106.8 1622.1 1310.7 1256.0 Number of clients1258.62089.31494.71106.81622.11310.71256.0 Number of regular clients 45.2 64.9 54.9 42.2 55.9 44.1 43.9 Number of regular clients45.264.954.942.255.944.143.9 Services PROVIDED to clients Services PROVIDED to clients (%) (%) No service provided 46(74.19) 13(68.42) 26(72.22) 43(71.67) 27(69.23) 56(69.14) 60(69.77) No service provided46(74.19) 13(68.42) 26(72.22) 43(71.67) 27(69.23) 56(69.14) 60(69.77) Discount over prices 23(37.10) 11(57.89) 16(44.44) 21(35.00) 18(46.15) 30(37.04) 31(36.05) Discount over prices23(37.10) 11(57.89) 16(44.44) 21(35.00) 18(46.15) 30(37.04) 31(36.05) Volume discounts 23(37.10) 12(63.16) 18(50.00) 25(41.67) 20(51.28) 34(41.98) 35(40.70) Volume discounts23(37.10) 12(63.16) 18(50.00) 25(41.67) 20(51.28) 34(41.98) 35(40.70) Sales on credit 8(!2.90) 2(10.53) 4(11.11) 7(11.67) 4(10.26) 10(12.35) 10(11.63) Sales on credit8(!2.90)2(10.53)4(11.11)7(11.67)4(10.26) 10(12.35) 10(11.63) Packing 9(14.52) 3(15.79) 7(19.44) 10(16.67) 7(17.95) 14(17.28) 14(16.28) Packing9(14.52)3(15.79)7(19.44)10(16.67)7(17.95) 14(17.28) 14(16.28) Special sorting 2(3.23) 0 0 3(5.00) 0 3(3.70) 3(3.49) Special sorting2(3.23)003(5.00)03(3.70)3(3.49) Share of retailers who received Share of retailers who received complaints from buyers over the complaints from buyers over the past 12 months (%) (n=176) past 12 months (%) (n=176) Yes 9(14.52) 2(11.11) 4(11.43) 51(85.00) 5(13.16) 11(13.58) 12(14.12) Yes9(14.52)2(11.11)4(11.43)51(85.00)5(13.16) 11(13.58) 12(14.12) No 53(85.48) 16(88.89) 31(88.57) 9(15.00) 33(86.84) 70(86.42) 73(85.88) No53(85.48) 16(88.89) 31(88.57)9(15.00)33(86.84) 70(86.42) 73(85.88) Reason of complaint (%) Reason of complaint (%) Dirty product 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Dirty product0000000 Variety 1(1.61) 0 0 1(1.67) 0 1(1.23) 1(1.16) Variety1(1.61)001(1.67)01(1.23)1(1.16) Color 6(9.68) 2(10.53) 1(2.78) 6(10.00) 2(5.13) 7(8.64) 7(8.14) Color6(9.68)2(10.53)1(2.78)6(10.00)2(5.13)7(8.64)7(8.14) Size 3(4.84) 2(10.53) 3(8.33) 4(6.67) 3(7.69) 4(4.94) 4(4.65) Size3(4.84)2(10.53)3(8.33)4(6.67)3(7.69)4(4.94)4(4.65) Firmness 8(12.90) 2(10.53) 5(13.89) 10(16.67) 5(12.82) 10(12.35) 10(11.63) Firmness8(12.90)2(10.53)5(13.89)10(16.67)5(12.82) 10(12.35) 10(11.63) Lack of volume in the box 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lack of volume in the box0000000 Deterioration/rottenness 3(4.84) 0 0 2(3.33) 0 3(3.70) 3(3.49) Deterioration/rottenness3(4.84)002(3.33)03(3.70)3(3.49) Bruised 2(3.23) 1(5.26) 1(2.78) 2(3.33) 2(5.13) 2(2.47) 2(2.33) Bruised2(3.23)1(5.26)1(2.78)2(3.33)2(5.13)2(2.47)2(2.33) Other 1(1.61) 0 0 0 0 1(1.23) 1(1.16) Other1(1.61)00001(1.23)1(1.16) "},{"text":"Table 11 : Assets Outlay of Neighbourhood Retailers DGLV VARF OF Other Vegetables All fruits All vegetables All DGLVVARFOFOther VegetablesAll fruitsAll vegetablesAll Observations Observations 1) Location of stall/shop of 1) Location of stall/shop of retailers retailers In home premises 18(29.03) 2(10.53) 7(19.44) 14(23.33) 8(20.51) 22(27.16) 22(25.58) In home premises18(29.03)2(10.53)7(19.44)14(23.33)8(20.51)22(27.16) 22(25.58) Market stall/shop 24(38.71) 12(63.16) 19(52.78) 26(43.33) 21(53.85) 32(39.51) 35(40.70) Market stall/shop24(38.71) 12(63.16) 19(52.78)26(43.33)21(53.85) 32(39.51) 35(40.70) Permanent table 12(19.35) 4(21.05) 9(25.00) 16(26.67) 9(23.08) 19(23.46) 21(24.42) Permanent table12(19.35)4(21.05)9(25.00)16(26.67)9(23.08)19(23.46) 21(24.42) Roadside display 8(12.90) 1(5.26) 1(2.78) 4(6.67) 1(2.56) 8(9.88) 8(9.30) Roadside display8(12.90)1(5.26)1(2.78)4(6.67)1(2.56)8(9.88)8(9.30) Wheel barrow(stationary) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Wheel barrow(stationary)0000000 Hawker 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hawker0000000 Other Other 2) Shares of retailers owning 2) Shares of retailers owning different type of assets: different type of assets: Cane basket 43(69.35) 18(94.74) 29(80.56) 43(71.67) 32(82.05) 57(70.37) 60(69.77) Cane basket43(69.35) 18(94.74) 29(80.56)43(71.67)32(82.05) 57(70.37) 60(69.77) Commercial Umbrella 5(8.06) 2(10.53) 3(8.57) 2(3.33) 3(7.89) 6(7.41) 6(7.06) Commercial Umbrella5(8.06)2(10.53)3(8.57)2(3.33)3(7.89)6(7.41)6(7.06) Wheel barrow(stationary) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Wheel barrow(stationary)0000000 Display items 55(88.71) 19(100) 33(94.29) 54(90.00) 36(94.74) 73(90.12) 77(90.59) Display items55(88.71)19(100)33(94.29)54(90.00)36(94.74) 73(90.12) 77(90.59) Motorcycle 0 0 1(2.86) 1(1.67) 1(2.73) 1(1.23) 1(1.18) Motorcycle001(2.86)1(1.67)1(2.73)1(1.23)1(1.18) Tricycle 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Tricycle0000000 Micra(small vehicle) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Micra(small vehicle)0000000 Bus 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Bus0000000 Phone 46(74.19) 16(84.21) 29(80.56) 46(76.67) 31(79.49) 62(76.54) 65(75.58) Phone46(74.19) 16(84.21) 29(80.56)46(76.67)31(79.49) 62(76.54) 65(75.58) Lamp 37(59.78) 10(52.63) 17(47.22) 33(55.00) 20(51.28) 46(56.79) 47(54.65) Lamp37(59.78) 10(52.63) 17(47.22)33(55.00)20(51.28) 46(56.79) 47(54.65) Store 33(53.23) 12(63.16) 23(63.89) 35(58.33) 25(64.10) 43(53.09) 45(52.33) Store33(53.23) 12(63.16) 23(63.89)35(58.33)25(64.10) 43(53.09) 45(52.33) Benches/stools 50(80.65) 15(78.95) 29(80.56) 52(86.67) 31(79.49) 66(81.48) 69(80.23) Benches/stools50(80.65) 15(78.95) 29(80.56)52(86.67)31(79.49) 66(81.48) 69(80.23) Refrigerator 1(1.64) 0 1(2.78) 1(1.67) 1(2.56) 1(1.25) 2(2.35) Refrigerator1(1.64)01(2.78)1(1.67)1(2.56)1(1.25)2(2.35) Generator 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Generator0000000 Others 5(8.06) 2(10.53) 3(8.33) 7(11.67) 3(7.69) 7(8.64) 7(8.14) Others5(8.06)2(10.53)3(8.33)7(11.67)3(7.69)7(8.64)7(8.14) 6) Total value of business assets (N thousands);n=86) 10160.33 10009.21 16078.47 9718.42 15659.62 10397.56 11370 6) Total value of business assets (N thousands);n=86)10160.33 10009.2116078.479718.4215659.6210397.5611370 "},{"text":"Table 12 : Business Cost and Revenue Outlays in Neighbourhood Markets DGLV VARF OF Other Vegetables All fruits All vegetables All DGLVVARFOFOther VegetablesAll fruitsAll vegetablesAll Business labor Business labor Daily workers 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Daily workers0000000 Family member Family member working in the 2.52 2.33 2.62 2.18 2.5 2.42 2.39 working in the2.522.332.622.182.52.422.39 shop/stall shop/stall Share of traders having Share of traders having family members a 19(30.65) 7(36.84) 11(30.56) 14(23.33) 12(30.77) 23(28.40) 26(30.23) family members a19(30.65) 7(36.84) 11(30.56) 14(23.33) 12(30.77) 23(28.40) 26(30.23) trader% trader% Labour cost per week - - - - - - Labour cost per week------ Business costs and Business costs and other information other information Total weekly business costs ( N ) 543.98 626.56 564.87 536.61 576.4 521.03 516.49 Total weekly business costs ( N )543.98626.56564.87536.61576.4521.03516.49 Total monthly business costs ( N ) 2175.93 2506.25 2259.49 2146.44 2305.59 2084.13 2065.98 Total monthly business costs ( N )2175.93 2506.25 2259.492146.442305.592084.132065.98 weekly cost of weekly cost of purchase of 3845 5724.74 3997.78 4633.16 4536.41 4131.41 purchase of38455724.74 3997.784633.164536.414131.41 commodities/inventory 4135.54 commodities/inventory4135.54 Total weekly business Total weekly business cost including 4292.47 6252.37 4468.5 4997.37 5024.13 4514.41 cost including4292.47 6252.374468.54997.375024.134514.41 inventory 4514.41 inventory4514.41 Weekly Revenue 1887.48 2840.61 1949.03 2036.01 2172.47 2128.51 2136.62 Weekly Revenue1887.48 2840.61 1949.032036.012172.472128.512136.62 Weekly Profit (Reve-Cost ) -2404.99 -3411.76 -2519.47 -2961.36 -2851.66 -2385.9 -2377.79 Weekly Profit (Reve-Cost )-2404.99-3411.76 -2519.47-2961.36-2851.66-2385.9-2377.79 "},{"text":"Table 13 : Functional Status of Retailers across Market Moniya Ojoo ALL MAIN MARKET Abaeja Bagadaje ALL NEIGHBOURHOOD MoniyaOjooALL MAIN MARKETAbaejaBagadajeALL NEIGHBOURHOOD Transaction Characteristics Transaction Characteristics Share of retailers who take possession Na na na na Na na Share of retailers who take possessionNanananaNana Share of retailers who sell their own production 6(85.71) 32(94.12) 38(92.68) 3(50.00) 5(83.33) 8(66.67) Share of retailers who sell their own production6(85.71) 32(94.12)38(92.68) 3(50.00) 5(83.33) 8(66.67) Purchasing Volume per season Purchasing Volume per season (KGS) (KGS) Weekly volume in high season (HS) 163.61 151.49 156.34 181.66 149.7 170.62 Weekly volume in high season (HS)163.61151.49156.34181.66149.7170.62 Weekly volume in HS (5 years ago) 215.94 160.53 182.44 255.59 476.82 336.36 Weekly volume in HS (5 years ago)215.94160.53182.44255.59476.82336.36 Weekly volume in low season (LS) 100.34 68.79 81.48 136.03 87.18 119.74 Weekly volume in low season (LS)100.3468.7981.48136.0387.18119.74 Weekly volume in LS (5 years ago) 115.7 63.67 84.16 194.25 352 250.23 Weekly volume in LS (5 years ago)115.763.6784.16194.25352250.23 Minimum and Maximum Sold Minimum and Maximum Sold Volume (KGS) Volume (KGS) Maximum weekly volume sold in HS 299.72 243.55 266.27 207.72 203.45 206.21 Maximum weekly volume sold in HS299.72243.55266.27207.72203.45206.21 Minimum weekly volume sold in HS 152.24 114.24 129.61 92.75 66.71 83.4 Minimum weekly volume sold in HS152.24114.24129.6192.7566.7183.4 "},{"text":"Figure 18: Historical Outlay of Fruit and Vegetable Retailing Across Market Types Maximum and minimum weekly sales were estimated at 129.61kg and 266.27kg in the main market; while it was 83.4kg and 206.21kg in the neighbourhood market. Moniya market had the highest sales volume (152.24kg and 299.72kg for minimum and maximum values, respectively) while Ojoo market recorded minimum and maximum sales values of 114.24kg and 243.55kg, respectively. Minimum and maximum weekly sales in the neighbourhood markets were 83.4kg and 206.21kg, respectively; with Abaeja taking the lead at 92.75kg and 207.72kg, respectively. The values above suggest that Moniya market and Abaeja market are lead markets in their respective typology (Main market and neighbourhood market) "},{"text":"Table 14 : Retailer and Suppliers Relations across Market Types , we present the results of retailer-supplier nexus across the market types surveyed, including origin of supply, transactional characteristics, service received and given to suppliers and quality complaints. First, weekly inventory purchase was valued at 280.85kg at a unit price of N74.98/kg in the main markets; while average Neighbourhood inventory purchase was 323.41kg at N75.96/kg. Moniya market recorded purchase value of 284.73kg at N76.17/kg; while retailers in Ojoo purchased 277.86kg at N74.07/kg. While retailers in Abaeja purchased 406.96kg at N73.39/kg; Bagadaje retailers recorded 159.30kg at N81.02/kg. The results further confirm the lead position of Moniya market (for main market type) and Abaeja (for neighbourhood market type). Moniya Ojoo All Main Markets Abaeja Bgadaje All neighbourhood markets MoniyaOjooAll Main MarketsAbaejaBgadajeAll neighbourhood markets Weekly volume NOW (KGS) 284.73 277.86 280.85 406.96 159.30 323.41 Weekly volume NOW (KGS)284.73277.86280.85406.96159.30323.41 Price per KG (N) 76.17 74.07 74.98 73.39 81.02 75.96 Price per KG (N)76.1774.0774.9873.3981.0275.96 Origin of supply (%) Origin of supply (%) Own production(n=8) 6(85.71) 32(94.12) 38(92.68) 3(50.00) 5(83.33) 8(66.67) Own production(n=8)6(85.71)32(94.12)38(92.68)3(50.00)5(83.33)8(66.67) Directly from farmers 60(83.33) 72(66.67) 132(73.33) 48(84.21) 26(89.66) 74(86.05) Directly from farmers60(83.33)72(66.67)132(73.33)48(84.21)26(89.66)74(86.05) Rural Broker 9(12.50) 11(10.19) 20(11.11) 5(8.77) 4(13.79) 9(10.47) Rural Broker9(12.50)11(10.19)20(11.11)5(8.77)4(13.79)9(10.47) Wholesaler 16(22.22) 21(19.44) 37(20.56 31(54.39) 8(27.59) 39(45.35) Wholesaler16(22.22)21(19.44)37(20.5631(54.39)8(27.59)39(45.35) Agrbusiness - 1(0.93) 1(0.56) 1(1.75) - 1(1.16) Agrbusiness-1(0.93)1(0.56)1(1.75)-1(1.16) Importer 1(1.39) 1(0.93) 2(1.11) - - - Importer1(1.39)1(0.93)2(1.11)--- Transaction characteristics Transaction characteristics Share of retailers who buy product sorted (%) 23(33.33) 26(28.89) 49(30.82) 22(38.60) 10(35.71) 32(37.65) Share of retailers who buy product sorted (%)23(33.33)26(28.89)49(30.82)22(38.60)10(35.71)32(37.65) "},{"text":"Table 15 : Retailer-Client Relationship in Fruits and Vegetables Retailing Across Market Types Retailers and Buyers Moniya Ojoo ALL MAIN MARKET Abaeja Bagadaje ALL NEIGHBOURHOOD MoniyaOjooALL MAIN MARKETAbaejaBagadajeALL NEIGHBOURHOOD Observations 86.00 Observations86.00 Weekly volume NOW (KGS) 441.50 309.77 358.77 93.38 82.86 89.61 Weekly volume NOW (KGS)441.50309.77358.7793.3882.8689.61 Price per KG (N) 46.30 80.68 73.46 86.50 65.00 78.79 Price per KG (N)46.3080.6873.4686.5065.0078.79 Clients (%) Clients (%) Directly to consumers 49(68.06) 87(80.56) 136(75.56) 55(96.49) 28(96.55) 83(96.51) Directly to consumers49(68.06)87(80.56)136(75.56)55(96.49)28(96.55)83(96.51) Traditional retailer 22(30.56) 29(26.85) 51(28.33) 3(5.26) 3(10.34) 6(6.98) Traditional retailer22(30.56)29(26.85)51(28.33)3(5.26)3(10.34)6(6.98) Ambulant Street Vendors/hawkers 14(19.44) 12(11.11) 26(14.44) 6(10.53) 1(3.45) 7(8.14) Ambulant Street Vendors/hawkers14(19.44)12(11.11)26(14.44)6(10.53)1(3.45)7(8.14) Street/sidewalk catering/restaurants 17(23.61) 17(15.74) 34(18.89) 2(3.51) 1(3.45) 3(3.49) Street/sidewalk catering/restaurants17(23.61)17(15.74)34(18.89)2(3.51)1(3.45)3(3.49) Neighbourhood supermarket 1(1.39) - 1(0.56) - - - Neighbourhood supermarket1(1.39)-1(0.56)--- Restaurant - - - 1(1.75) - 1(1.16) Restaurant---1(1.75)-1(1.16) Transaction characteristics Transaction characteristics Share of retailers who sell product sorted (%) 25(35.71) 38(35.19) 63(35.39) 28(49.12) 16(55.17) 44(51.16) Share of retailers who sell product sorted (%)25(35.71)38(35.19)63(35.39)28(49.12)16(55.17)44(51.16) Share of retailers who keep written records of sell (%) 3(4.17) 3(2.78) 6(3.33) - - - Share of retailers who keep written records of sell (%)3(4.17)3(2.78)6(3.33)--- Share of retailers who have any agreement with buyers (%); 10(14.29) 13(12.04) 23(12.94) 8(14.04) 4(13.79) 12(13.95) Share of retailers who have any agreement with buyers (%);10(14.29)13(12.04)23(12.94)8(14.04)4(13.79)12(13.95) Number of clients 1,326.51 1,990.58 1741.0 1,260.65 1,246.43 1,255.98 Number of clients1,326.511,990.581741.01,260.651,246.431,255.98 Number of regular clients 43.34 63.70 55.9 41.42 48.52 43.85 Number of regular clients43.3463.7055.941.4248.5243.85 Services PROVIDED to client (%) Services PROVIDED to client (%) No service provided (n=180) 47(65.28) 60(55.56) 107(59.44) 42(73.68) 18(62.07) 60(69.77) No service provided (n=180)47(65.28)60(55.56)107(59.44)42(73.68)18(62.07)60(69.77) Discount over pricesn=180) 23(31.94) 42(38.89) 65(36.1) 20(35.09) 11(37.93) 31(36.05) Discount over pricesn=180)23(31.94)42(38.89)65(36.1)20(35.09)11(37.93)31(36.05) Volume discounts 22(30.56) 45(41.67) 67(37.22) 21(36.84) 14(48.28) 35(40.70) Volume discounts22(30.56)45(41.67)67(37.22)21(36.84)14(48.28)35(40.70) Sales on credit 7(9.72) 11(10.19) 18(10) 7(12.28) 3(10.34) 10(11.63) Sales on credit7(9.72)11(10.19)18(10)7(12.28)3(10.34)10(11.63) Packing 17(23.61) 19(17.59) 36(20.0) 9(15.79) 5(17.24) 14(16.28) Packing17(23.61)19(17.59)36(20.0)9(15.79)5(17.24)14(16.28) Special sorting 5(5.57) 4(4.30) 9(5.00) 2(3.51) 1(3.45) 3(3.49) Special sorting5(5.57)4(4.30)9(5.00)2(3.51)1(3.45)3(3.49) Other Other Share of retailers who received Share of retailers who received complaints from buyers over the past 12 complaints from buyers over the past 12 months (%) (n=176) months (%) (n=176) Yes 7(10.00) 19(17.92) 26(14.77) 8(14.04) 4(14.29) 12(14.12) Yes7(10.00)19(17.92)26(14.77)8(14.04)4(14.29)12(14.12) No 63(90.00) 87(82.08) 150(85.23) 49(85.96) 24(85.71) 73(85.88) No63(90.00)87(82.08)150(85.23)49(85.96)24(85.71)73(85.88) Reason of complaint (%) Reason of complaint (%) Dirty product 2(278) - 2(1.11) - - - Dirty product2(278)-2(1.11)--- Variety 1(1.39) 1(0.93) 2(1.11) 1(1.75) - 1(1.16) Variety1(1.39)1(0.93)2(1.11)1(1.75)-1(1.16) Color 4(5.56) 13(12.04) 17(9.44) 4(7.02) 3(10.34) 7(8.14) Color4(5.56)13(12.04)17(9.44)4(7.02)3(10.34)7(8.14) Size 2(2.78) 6(5.56) 8(4.44) 2(3.51) 2(6.90) 4(4.65) Size2(2.78)6(5.56)8(4.44)2(3.51)2(6.90)4(4.65) Firmness 5(6.94) 7(6.48) 12(6.67) 5(8.77) 5(17.24) 10(11.63) Firmness5(6.94)7(6.48)12(6.67)5(8.77)5(17.24)10(11.63) Lack of volume in the box - - 0 - - - Lack of volume in the box--0--- Deterioration/rotteness 2(2.78) 9(8.33) 11(6.11) 2(3.51) 1(3.45) 3(3.49) Deterioration/rotteness2(2.78)9(8.33)11(6.11)2(3.51)1(3.45)3(3.49) "},{"text":"Locational Characteristics of Retailers across market Type All Neighborhood markets All Neighborhood markets Bagadaje Bagadaje Abaeja Abaeja All Main markets All Main markets Ojoo Ojoo Moniya Moniya 0 2 4 6 8 percentage response 10 12 14 16 18 20 02468 percentage response 10 1214161820 Bruised Deterioration/rotteness Firmness Size Color BruisedDeterioration/rottenessFirmnessSizeColor "},{"text":"Table 16 : Locational Characteristics across Market Types Market type / Location Moniya Ojoo All Main Market Abaeja Bgadaje All Neighbourhood Market type / LocationMoniyaOjooAll Main MarketAbaejaBgadaje All Neighbourhood In home premises 1.39 0.93 1.11 21.05 34.48 25.58 In home premises1.390.931.1121.0534.4825.58 Market stall/shop 12.50 3.70 7.22 36.84 48.28 40.70 Market stall/shop12.503.707.2236.8448.2840.70 Permanent table 8.33 36.11 25.00 28.07 17.24 24.42 Permanent table8.3336.1125.0028.0717.2424.42 Roadside display 76.36 58.33 65.56 14.04 - 9.30 Roadside display76.3658.3365.5614.04-9.30 Wheelbarrow(stationary) - 0.93 0.56 - - - Wheelbarrow(stationary)-0.930.56--- Hawker 1.39 - 0.56 Hawker1.39-0.56 "},{"text":"Table 17 : Physical Asset Outlays across Market Types Market type / Location Moniya Ojoo All Main Market Abaeja Bagadaje All Neighbourhood Market type / LocationMoniyaOjooAll Main MarketAbaejaBagadajeAll Neighbourhood Cane basket 63(87.50) 74(68.52) 137(76.11) 21(58.33) 7(53.85) 28(57.14) Cane basket63(87.50) 74(68.52) 137(76.11) 21(58.33) 7(53.85)28(57.14) Commercial Umbrella 24(34.29) 1(3.57) 82(46.33) 5(8.77) 1(3.57 6(7.06) Commercial Umbrella24(34.29)1(3.57)82(46.33)5(8.77)1(3.576(7.06) Wheel barrow(stationary) 4(5.71) 4(3.74) 8(4.52) - - - Wheel barrow(stationary)4(5.71)4(3.74)8(4.52)--- Display items 65(91.55) 101(93.52) 166(92.74) 53(92.98) 24(85.71) 77(90.59) Display items65(91.55) 101(93.52) 166(92.74) 53(92.98) 24(85.71)77(90.59) Motorcycle 1(1.41) 2(1.85) 3(1.68) - 1(3.57) 1(1.18) Motorcycle1(1.41)2(1.85)3(1.68)-1(3.57)1(1.18) "},{"text":"Table 18 : Business Costs and Revenue Outlay across Market Types Business Costs and Revenues Streams Moniya Ojoo All Main Market Abaeja Bgadaje All neighbourhood MoniyaOjooAll Main MarketAbaejaBgadajeAll neighbourhood "},{"text":"Table A1_1 : Estimated number of F&V vendors in main markets Total non- Total non- Total Leafy leafy Total vendors of Total LeafyleafyTotal vendors of Total fruits vegetables vegetables both fruits and Total fruitsvegetablesvegetablesboth fruits and vendors vendors vendors vegetables vendorsvendorsvendorsvegetables OJOO MARKET OJOO MARKET Market day morning 45 134 47 30 Market daymorning451344730 afternoon 81 77 138 33 afternoon817713833 Evening 69 59 116 23 Evening695911623 Weekend morning 29 16 39 2 Weekendmorning2916392 afternoon 45 19 78 13 afternoon45197813 Evening 40 26 76 16 Evening40267616 Weekday morning 4 11 14 1 Weekdaymorning411141 afternoon 42 25 59 10 afternoon42255910 Evening 44 43 71 14 Evening44437114 MONIYA MARKET MONIYA MARKET Market day morning 30 55 55 1 Market day morning3055551 afternoon 33 41 109 15 afternoon334110915 Evening 13 26 56 9 Evening1326569 Weekend morning 8 13 26 6 Weekend morning813266 afternoon 16 13 41 8 afternoon1613418 Evening 15 19 52 9 Evening1519529 Weekday morning 3 5 10 2 Weekday morning35102 afternoon 9 18 32 9 afternoon918329 Evening 14 32 35 6 Evening1432356 "},{"text":"Table A1_2 : Estimated number of F&V vendors by Neighborhood Total Leafy Total Leafy Total fruits vegetables Total non-leafy Total vendors of both fruits Total fruitsvegetablesTotal non-leafyTotal vendors of both fruits vendors vendors vegetables vendors and vegetables vendorsvendorsvegetables vendorsand vegetables Abaeja (urban) 10 23 40 6 Abaeja (urban)1023406 Bagadaje (peri Bagadaje (peri urban 7 14 33 4 urban714334 "},{"text":"Table A1_3 : Fruit and vegetable availability by market and area Market Neighborhood MarketNeighborhood Ojoo Monya Abaeja Bagadaje OjooMonyaAbaejaBagadaje market Market (urban) marketMarket(urban) "},{"text":"Table A2_1 Census results 17c. Can you name them? (multiple entries) green peas -- 17c. Can you name them? (multiple entries) green peas-- Area green bell pepper Retailer type a) Ojoo b) Moniya Red bell pepper Total number Seller has a Seller sells Tatase dudu Average number Tatase pupa Average number of Average number Average number of Area green bell pepper Retailer type a) Ojoo b) Moniya Red bell pepperTotal numberSeller has aSeller sells Tatase dudu Average number Tatase pupaAverage number ofAverage numberAverage number of spring onions c) Sasa e) Apapa d) Bodija lettuce of actors in this area shop/stall other products (than F&Vs) Alubosa oyibiri of days seller spend at shop/stall -- years of experience selling F&Vs of target products sold by sellers F&Vs (ALL) sellers sold by spring onions c) Sasa e) Apapa d) Bodija lettuceof actors in this areashop/stallother products (than F&Vs) Alubosa oyibiri of days seller spend at shop/stall --years of experience selling F&Vsof target products sold by sellersF&Vs (ALL) sellers sold by Abaeja f) Others (specify) Hawker 1 0% 100% 7.0 20.0 2.0 3.0 Abaeja f) Others (specify) Hawker10%100%7.020.02.03.0 Inside the house 18 a. Are you a member of any groups or associations in the market? If no skip to 19. 18 100% 72% 6.9 14.1 7.1 9.2 Inside the house 18 a. Are you a member of any groups or associations in the market? If no skip to 19. 18 100% 72% 6.9 14.17.19.2 Market stall/ shop 18 b. Name them ______________________________________ 36 100% 86% 6.7 8.1 5.0 6.7 Market stall/ shop 18 b. Name them ______________________________________ 36 100% 86% 6.78.15.06.7 Others (specify) 19 What determines whether you come to this market or not? 1 100% 0% 7.0 2.0 12.0 17.0 Others (specify) 19 What determines whether you come to this market or not? 1 100% 0%7.02.012.017.0 Permanent table 20. Is it possible that you will stop coming to this market this year? Y/N if no, skip to 22. 19 100% 63% 6.7 7.4 6.6 8.6 Permanent table 20. Is it possible that you will stop coming to this market this year? Y/N if no, skip to 22. 19 100% 63% 6.7 7.4 6.68.6 Roadside display (all) 21. When will you stop coming? (pick one month) 10 60% 60% 6.7 9.7 6.1 8.7 Roadside display (all) 21. When will you stop coming? (pick one month) 10 60%60%6.79.76.18.7 Bagadaje Hawker July 1 0% October 0% 7.0 5.0 3.0 5.0 Bagadaje Hawker July10% October0%7.05.03.05.0 August Inside the house 9 100% November 56% 4c. Moniya market sections: 7.0 5.8 5.7 7.4 22. TYPE AugustInside the house9100% November56% 4c. Moniya market sections: 7.0 5.85.77.422. TYPE Market stall/ shop Others (specify) 1. Police Station and environs (left and right 29 100% 6 100% side) September December 93% 100% 1. From Police station 6.8 6.7 7.0 9.8 6.7 2.5 8.6 4.3 OF Market stall/ shop Others (specify) 1. Police Station and environs (left and right 29 100% 6 100% side) September December93% 100% 1. From Police station 6.8 6.7 7.0 9.86.7 2.58.6 4.3OF Permanent table 2. Big round about and small round about 8 100% VENDOR : (pick 1) Moniya Hawker 1 0% 3. Sabo, Abatakan/Barracks a. Roadside display (cloth) 63% 0% f. Wheelbarrow (mobile) 7.0 7.5 2. Towards Akuro and odo eran 7.5 2.0 8.0 3.0 9.9 3.0 Permanent table 2. Big round about and small round about 8 100% VENDOR : (pick 1) Moniya Hawker 1 0% 3. Sabo, Abatakan/Barracks a. Roadside display (cloth)63% 0% f. Wheelbarrow (mobile) 7.0 7.5 2. Towards Akuro and odo eran 7.5 2.0 8.0 3.09.9 3.0 Market stall/ shop b. Roadside display (nylon) 16 100% 56% g. Market stall/ shop 5.4 14.9 5.4 7.8 Market stall/ shop b. Roadside display (nylon)16100%56% g. Market stall/ shop 5.414.95.47.8 Others (specify) 5. Type of market day (pick one): a. Weekend b. Market day c. Weekday 6 67% 67% 1.0 5.4 c. Roadside display (sack) h. Permanent table 3.2 4.5 Others (specify) 5. Type of market day (pick one): a. Weekend b. Market day c. Weekday 6 67% 67% 1.0 5.4 c. Roadside display (sack) h. Permanent table3.24.5 Permanent table d. Roadside display (tray ) 4 100% 25% i. Inside the house 6.0 15.3 3.0 5.8 Permanent table d. Roadside display (tray )4100%25% i. Inside the house 6.015.33.05.8 Roadside display (all) 6. Day of visit (choose one) e. Wheelbarrow (stationary 163 79% 42% j. hawker (go to 23) 1.5 11.5 3.3 5.0 Roadside display (all) 6. Day of visit (choose one) e. Wheelbarrow (stationary16379%42% j. hawker (go to 23) 1.511.53.35.0 Ojoo Hawker Market stall/ shop o Tuesday o Sunday o Monday 4 7 25% 100% 0% 71% k. Others (specify) 3.8 5.3 o Friday 4.1 17.1 o Wednesday o Thursday 2.5 1.3 3.3 2.7 OjooHawker Market stall/ shop o Tuesday o Sunday o Monday4 725% 100%0% 71% k. Others (specify) 3.8 5.3 o Friday 4.1 17.1 o Wednesday o Thursday2.5 1.33.3 2.7 Others (specify) 23. Do you own a store or an you an independent hawker (pick one): 3 100% 0% 1.7 o Saturday 14.7 2.3 4.0 Others (specify) 23. Do you own a store or an you an independent hawker (pick one): 3 100% 0% 1.7 o Saturday 14.72.34.0 Permanent table Roadside display (all) 7. Time of visit: (choose one) a) Independent b) from market stall/shop. 90 141 100% 89% 42% 40% 5.6 2.2 15.6 11.3 3.6 4.5 5.8 6.0 Permanent table Roadside display (all) 7. Time of visit: (choose one) a) Independent b) from market stall/shop. 90 141100% 89%42% 40%5.6 2.215.6 11.33.6 4.55.8 6.0 Wheelbarrow (all) 24. WHAT IS YOUR normal daily route? ___________________________________________ 6 100% 0% 6.0 2.5 0.7 a. Morning b. Afternoon c. Evening 2.0 Wheelbarrow (all) 24. WHAT IS YOUR normal daily route? ___________________________________________ 6 100% 0% 6.0 2.5 0.7 a. Morning b. Afternoon c. Evening2.0 TOTAL 25. Interview end time: _________________________________(dropdown of AM or PM) 579 TOTAL 25. Interview end time: _________________________________(dropdown of AM or PM) 579 26. ENTER GPS COORDINATES 26. ENTER GPS COORDINATES THANK RESPONDENT AND END INTERVIEW THANK RESPONDENT AND END INTERVIEW "},{"text":"Table A3_1 Summary of weights and prices for conversion of local measures to standard measures (KG) Medium heap Bunches 1.12 0.79 100.00 72.19 Medium heap Bunches1.12 0.79100.00 72.19 small heap YELLOW BANANA 0.61 50.00 small heap YELLOW BANANA0.6150.00 COMMODITY/ LOCAL MEASURE WEIGHT (KG) TANGERINE -Large stick 7.70 PRICE(N) -500.00 COMMODITY/ LOCAL MEASURE WEIGHT (KG) TANGERINE -Large stick 7.70PRICE(N) -500.00 EWEDU Large basket Medium stick 27.95 4.88 1,750.00 450.00 EWEDU Large basket Medium stick27.95 4.881,750.00 450.00 Large Bundle medium basket Bunches 13.00 20.50 0.90 1,021.43 1,500.00 111.25 Large Bundle medium basket Bunches13.00 20.50 0.901,021.43 1,500.00 111.25 medium bundle Standard basket ONION 1.10 6.00 110.42 750.00 medium bundle Standard basket ONION1.10 6.00110.42 750.00 Small bundle Medium heap Large Owo 0.35 0.92 7.10 50.00 100.00 2,000.00 Small bundle Medium heap Large Owo0.35 0.92 7.1050.00 100.00 2,000.00 SOKO IBILE small heap Medium Owo 0.52 3.80 50.00 1,000.00 SOKO IBILE small heap Medium Owo0.52 3.8050.00 1,000.00 Large Bundle TANGELO Small owo 5.69 -3.05 408.08 -750.00 Large Bundle TANGELO Small owo5.69 -3.05408.08 -750.00 medium bundle Large basket Large plate 0.77 24.68 0.64 100.00 1,675.00 191.67 medium bundle Large basket Large plate0.77 24.68 0.64100.00 1,675.00 191.67 Small bundle medium basket medium plate 0.51 21.07 0.34 50.00 1,600.00 100.00 Small bundle medium basket medium plate0.51 21.07 0.3450.00 1,600.00 100.00 SOKO AGRIC Standard basket Small plate 9.40 0.22 800.00 50.00 SOKO AGRIC Standard basket Small plate9.40 0.22800.00 50.00 Large Bundle large heap Small onion pieces 19.60 0.86 0.09 1,000.00 162.50 20.00 Large Bundle large heap Small onion pieces19.60 0.86 0.091,000.00 162.50 20.00 medium bundle Medium heap 1.38 0.87 143.33 100.00 medium bundle Medium heap1.38 0.87143.33 100.00 Small bundle small heap 0.42 0.49 50.00 50.00 Small bundle small heap0.42 0.4950.00 50.00 TETE IBILE AGBALUMO(African star apple) TETE IBILE AGBALUMO(African star apple) Large Bundle Oje large basket 11.98 31.35 1,000.00 2,750.00 Large Bundle Oje large basket11.98 31.351,000.00 2,750.00 Medium bundle Large basket 0.98 25.79 75.00 1,850.00 Medium bundle Large basket0.98 25.7975.00 1,850.00 Small bundle Medium basket 0.60 7.70 50.00 683.33 Small bundle Medium basket0.60 7.7050.00 683.33 TETE AGRIC Small basket 5.89 275.00 TETE AGRIC Small basket5.89275.00 Large Bundle Small heap 48.79 0.57 2,141.21 100.00 Large Bundle Small heap48.79 0.572,141.21 100.00 medium bundle Smallest heap 1.79 0.52 155.28 50.00 medium bundle Smallest heap1.79 0.52155.28 50.00 Small bundle Unit of 3 pieces 0.46 0.23 52.38 50.00 Small bundle Unit of 3 pieces0.46 0.2352.38 50.00 UGWU MANGO UGWU MANGO Large Bundle OJE(OGBOMOSO MANGO) 19.13 3,841.67 Large Bundle OJE(OGBOMOSO MANGO)19.133,841.67 medium bundle Standard basket(big) 1.36 13.62 397.92 1,000.00 medium bundle Standard basket(big)1.36 13.62397.92 1,000.00 Small bundle Standard Basket (medium) 0.26 10.28 67.92 800.00 Small bundle Standard Basket (medium)0.26 10.2867.92 800.00 WATER LEAF* OGBOMOSO MANGO WATER LEAF* OGBOMOSO MANGO Bagco Bag Large basket 4.32 30.84 225.00 1,800.00 Bagco Bag Large basket4.32 30.84225.00 1,800.00 Idi (heap) Medium basket 0.67 9.92 47.47 500.00 Idi (heap) Medium basket0.67 9.9247.47 500.00 Idi(heap) Standard basket(big size) 0.50 - 23.13 - Idi(heap) Standard basket(big size)0.50 -23.13 - BITTER LEAF Standard basket (medium size) 6.58 600.00 BITTER LEAF Standard basket (medium size)6.58600.00 Large Bundle Small heap 3.06 0.91 240.00 133.33 Large Bundle Small heap3.06 0.91240.00 133.33 medium bundle Small heap (hard) 1.28 0.83 73.33 100.00 medium bundle Small heap (hard)1.28 0.8373.33 100.00 Small bundle Small heap(soft) 0.51 0.82 36.72 100.00 Small bundle Small heap(soft)0.51 0.8236.72 100.00 WET BITTER LEAF* Small measure 0.93 100.00 WET BITTER LEAF* Small measure0.93100.00 Congo Smallest measure 1.32 0.61 325.00 50.00 Congo Smallest measure1.32 0.61325.00 50.00 Portion CHERRY MANGO 0.42 75.00 Portion CHERRY MANGO0.4275.00 OKRO Large basket 31.39 1,000.00 OKRO Large basket31.391,000.00 Standard Basket Medium basket 5.61 9.70 1,241.67 300.00 Standard Basket Medium basket5.61 9.701,241.67 300.00 small Bucket Standard basket(big size) 2.69 - 300.00 - small Bucket Standard basket(big size)2.69 -300.00 - small plate Standard basket (medium size) 0.25 9.20 50.00 500.00 small plate Standard basket (medium size)0.25 9.2050.00 500.00 RED BELL PEPPER Small heap -0.77 -100.00 RED BELL PEPPER Small heap-0.77-100.00 small Bucket Small heap (hard) 2.07 - 913.57 - small Bucket Small heap (hard)2.07 -913.57 - Large plate Small heap(soft) 0.61 - 200.00 - Large plate Small heap(soft)0.61 -200.00 - Medium Plate Small measure 0.27 1.17 100.00 75.00 Medium Plate Small measure0.27 1.17100.00 75.00 small plate Smallest measure 0.20 0.86 50.00 50.00 small plate Smallest measure0.20 0.8650.00 50.00 WHITE GARDEN EGG PAWPAW - - WHITE GARDEN EGG PAWPAW-- Big Sack Basket 39.60 2.34 2,850.00 171.00 Big Sack Basket39.60 2.342,850.00 171.00 small sack Large piece 23.60 3.07 1,500.00 285.21 small sack Large piece23.60 3.071,500.00 285.21 Bagco bag Medium piece 12.00 1.62 -101.15 Bagco bag Medium piece12.00 1.62-101.15 Medium Plate small piece 0.53 0.82 100.00 46.27 Medium Plate small piece0.53 0.82100.00 46.27 small plate PINEAPPLE 0.65 50.00 small plate PINEAPPLE0.6550.00 GREEN GARDEN EGG Basket -- -- GREEN GARDEN EGG Basket---- small sack Large piece 32.60 2.99 2,700.00 650.00 small sack Large piece32.60 2.992,700.00 650.00 Medium Plate Medium piece 0.45 1.33 100.00 289.35 Medium Plate Medium piece0.45 1.33100.00 289.35 small plate small piece 0.52 1.06 50.00 243.75 small plate small piece0.52 1.0650.00 243.75 ORANGES WHITE BANANA ORANGES WHITE BANANA Big sack Large stick 35.65 8.68 4,000.00 582.08 Big sack Large stick35.65 8.684,000.00 582.08 owo pieces# Medium stick 1.29 6.11 72.92 375.63 owo pieces# Medium stick1.29 6.1172.92 375.63 large heap small stick 1.50 5.08 193.75 189.26 large heap small stick1.50 5.08193.75 189.26 "},{"text":"Key: 1 spouse, 2 son/daughter, 3 other] BUSINESS DETAILS 14a. * Are you the only person funding this business. Yes/No ( if yes, skip to 15) 14b. am not expecting you give a specific answer; I would like you to answer questions honestly, telling me about what you know, how you feel, the way you live and how you eat and prepare food. Feel free to answer questions at your own pace. ________ 13a. Are you the owner of this business? (if yes, skip to 14a) 13b. Respondents relationship with owner: _____ [How many partners are in the business: _____________ 15.How long have you (business) been selling fruits and vegetables in THIS location? 16 *Do you sell fruits and vegetables in any other location? 1.Yes 2.No (if no, skip to question 22) Daily, 2. Every two days 3. Weekly 4. Every three days .5. *Other (specify) *Did you farm with produce that is yours in the past 12 months? Yes/No if no, skip section 35b. *Did you sell produce from your farm in the past 12 months? Yes/No if no, skip section. II. GENERAL INFORMATION ___________________________ V. Own production II. GENERAL INFORMATION ___________________________ V. Own production Would you like to participate in this survey? 1.Yes I. PRELIMINARY INFORMATION 6. Start time: _________________________________(dropdown of AM or PM) 2.No Signatures 7. Date of Visit (DD/MM/YY): …….... /…….……/ 2019 8. *NAME OF MARKET c. Ojoo (go to 4b) d. Moniya (go to 4c) 4b. Ojoo market sections: 4. Police Station and environs (left and right side) 5. Big round about and small round about 6. Sabo, Abatakan/Barracks 4c. Moniya market sections: 3. From Police station 4. Towards Akuro and odo eran 5. Type of market day (pick one): a. Weekend b. Market day c. Weekday 6. Day of visit (choose one) o Sunday o Monday o Tuesday o Wednesday o Thursday o Friday o Saturday 11.Gender of the respondent: 1.M 2.F (multiselect) 18. how do you sell in those places (options in question 9) 19. How are the property owned. (multiselect) 20. how many stalls/shops do you have in those Moniya Ojoo Abaeja Bagadaje Sasa none 5. Market fee 4. Owned 3. borrowed 2. Rented 1. (numeral) 28.Product months? months? places last 12 last 12 sold in the sold in the NOW 5 YEARS AGO 29. ***Average weekly volume in high season 30. ***Average weekly volume in low season 31. ***What is the maximum weekly volume (Kgs) that you have 32. ***What is the minimum weekly volume (Kgs) that you have 33. ***Average weekly volume in high season 5 years ago 34. ***Average 21. since (year) when? weekly volume in low season 5 years ago 5. 12.Age: 17. Where is it located? Selling volume per season (for your current stall/shop in this neighborhood) 3. 4. CODE 1: 1. IV. 2. 10.Name of respondent: ______________________ 5. 1. 5. Enumerator Name(s)/initials:_________________________________________ 8. Relevant Products sold by vendor 1. 2. 9. Type of retailer:_ a. Roadside display (cloth, nylon, sack, tray) b. Wheelbarrow (stationary c. Wheelbarrow (mobile) d. Market stall/ shop e. Permanent table 4. point h. Others (specify) 3. to the selling g. hawker 2. take you to get f. Inside the house move to 28 long does it 12 months skip 23bi to 27v and 40b. How in the last product, yes/no if no, (m 2 ) your farm Ask if there is another area? (year) of your farm provided by 5. 1. 2.No cropping cropping? neighborhood Volume 4. CODE 1 product? Product the last 12 months? 1.Yes was the you begin the ***Weekly 3. III. PRODUCT COMERCIALISATION 23. Product 24. How often is [product] supplied while in season? 25. In what months do you sell the 26. When is the high season for this crop? 27. When is the low season for this crop? 37. Did you crop [product] in 38. *What 39. When did 40a. where is 41. 35a. 36. 44 Would you like to participate in this survey? 1.Yes I. PRELIMINARY INFORMATION 6. Start time: _________________________________(dropdown of AM or PM) 2.No Signatures 7. Date of Visit (DD/MM/YY): …….... /…….……/ 2019 8. *NAME OF MARKET c. Ojoo (go to 4b) d. Moniya (go to 4c) 4b. Ojoo market sections: 4. Police Station and environs (left and right side) 5. Big round about and small round about 6. Sabo, Abatakan/Barracks 4c. Moniya market sections: 3. From Police station 4. Towards Akuro and odo eran 5. Type of market day (pick one): a. Weekend b. Market day c. Weekday 6. Day of visit (choose one) o Sunday o Monday o Tuesday o Wednesday o Thursday o Friday o Saturday 11.Gender of the respondent: 1.M 2.F (multiselect) 18. how do you sell in those places (options in question 9) 19. How are the property owned. (multiselect) 20. how many stalls/shops do you have in those Moniya Ojoo Abaeja Bagadaje Sasa none 5. Market fee 4. Owned 3. borrowed 2. Rented 1. (numeral) 28.Product months? months? places last 12 last 12 sold in the sold in the NOW 5 YEARS AGO 29. ***Average weekly volume in high season 30. ***Average weekly volume in low season 31. ***What is the maximum weekly volume (Kgs) that you have 32. ***What is the minimum weekly volume (Kgs) that you have 33. ***Average weekly volume in high season 5 years ago 34. ***Average 21. since (year) when? weekly volume in low season 5 years ago 5. 12.Age: 17. Where is it located? Selling volume per season (for your current stall/shop in this neighborhood) 3. 4. CODE 1: 1. IV. 2. 10.Name of respondent: ______________________ 5. 1. 5. Enumerator Name(s)/initials:_________________________________________ 8. Relevant Products sold by vendor 1. 2. 9. Type of retailer:_ a. Roadside display (cloth, nylon, sack, tray) b. Wheelbarrow (stationary c. Wheelbarrow (mobile) d. Market stall/ shop e. Permanent table 4. point h. Others (specify) 3. to the selling g. hawker 2. take you to get f. Inside the house move to 28 long does it 12 months skip 23bi to 27v and 40b. How in the last product, yes/no if no, (m 2 ) your farm Ask if there is another area? (year) of your farm provided by 5. 1. 2.No cropping cropping? neighborhood Volume 4. CODE 1 product? Product the last 12 months? 1.Yes was the you begin the ***Weekly 3. III. PRODUCT COMERCIALISATION 23. Product 24. How often is [product] supplied while in season? 25. In what months do you sell the 26. When is the high season for this crop? 27. When is the low season for this crop? 37. Did you crop [product] in 38. *What 39. When did 40a. where is 41. 35a. 36. 44 Bodija 7. Time of visit: (choose one) Onidundu Other Bodija 7. Time of visit: (choose one) OnidunduOther a. Morning Ijaiye b. Afternoon c. Evening a. Morning Ijaiyeb. Afternoonc. Evening Elekuru Elekuru Others, specify Others, specify 22. In what other businesses/profession are you involved (indicate type of business)? 22. In what other businesses/profession are you involved (indicate type of business)? Groceries/provision Groceries/provision Clothing/wears Clothing/wears Kitchen utensils Kitchen utensils Farming Farming Other food stuffs Other food stuffs Other, specify Other, specify "},{"text":"Last sale (for only one product) Now think about the last time that you sold 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 92. Variety ____________________ 93. What date did you sell? _____________, 94. *did you grade the product? 1. Yes ____ 2.No ___ (If you answered no, skip to the question 95) 95. ***If you sold by grades, what were the grades and volumes sold? Grade high __________ volume___________ Grade medium ___________ volume__________ Grade low __________ volume___________ (screener question) any other grade category yes/no if yes, provide grade name (text) in numeral answer, and the unit dropdown 96. Who did you sell the product to?______________________ 97.*Do you pay anything to government or market after every sale? Yes/no if no, skip to 100a 98. Costs and payments 99. if you paid, How much did it cost? Cost Unit a.Did you pay Sales tax Yes/No b.sorting for buyer c.special packaging d.product load to the transportation means e.transportation from your stall to your buyer delivery point f.product download g.Other expenses 100a. *Is your last sales location different from this location. Yes/No if no, skip to 101 100b Where is it? (text) 101. ***How much did you profit per kg (or sale unit) sold in last sale? __________ 102. ***How much is the maximum that you have profited per kg (or sale unit) on entire lifetime sales? ________________ 103. ***How much is the minimum that you have profited per kg (or sale unit) on entire lifetime sales? ________________ 104. *Do you regularly check the prices in other markets? 1.Yes__ 2.No __ 3. I don't know(ADD TO TAB) (If no, skip to question 108) 105. Where? _______________ 45 FOOD SAFETY (This whole section might be revised slightly for the Nigerian context. A bigger focus on basic hygiene as well as pesticides would be good to include) "},{"text":"and perishability of the products and other information 119. *Do you have a place where you store your produce? Yes/No (screener question) if no, skip to 127 120. Number of employees that you have in THIS shop/stall (Does not include family members) Permanent ___________ per day _______per task apprentices Other_____ 128. How many family members do you have working with you selling these products?__________________ 129. How many of your family members are traders of these product on their own? Daily, 2. Weekly, 3. Every two weeks 4. Monthly, 5. Every six months, 6. Yearly. 121. ***How 122 *.How 123. What 124. What 121. ***How122 *.How123. What124. What Product much of each is the is the is the 125. 126. Productmuch of eachis theis theis the125.126. (should product can be [product] maximum maximum ***Considering ***Considering (shouldproduct can be[product]maximummaximum***Considering***Considering be stored in your stored storage storage your weekly your weekly bestored in yourstoredstoragestorageyour weeklyyour weekly single stall/shop? normally? time in dry time in volume, What volume, What singlestall/shop?normally?time in drytime involume, Whatvolume, What select CODE 2 (by season? raining is the waste in is the waste in selectCODE 2 (byseason?rainingis the waste inis the waste in on number of (days) season? high season low season onnumber of(days)season?high seasonlow season TAB) days) (days) (Kgs)? (Kgs)? TAB)days)(days)(Kgs)?(Kgs)? 1. Replace with Replace with Replace with 1.Replace withReplace withReplace with units units units unitsunitsunits 2. 2. 3. 3. 4. 4. 5. 5. CODE 2: 1. Room temperature 2. Chilled/refrigerated 3.dew temperature CODE 2: 1. Room temperature 2. Chilled/refrigerated 3.dew temperature 1. BUSINESS COSTS (FIXED AND VARIABLE) 1. BUSINESS COSTS (FIXED AND VARIABLE) Employees Employees 127. _________________ 127. _________________ 130. Cost category 131. Amount 132. Time frame 130. Cost category131. Amount132. Time frame (Naira) CODE 1 (Naira)CODE 1 1.did you pay for Electricity Yes/No 1.did you pay for Electricity Yes/No 2.Rent of stall 2.Rent of stall 3.Market/commune fee 3.Market/commune fee 4,Association fee 4,Association fee 5.Public toilet 5.Public toilet 6.Electric generator fuel 6.Electric generator fuel 7.Labor expenses 7.Labor expenses 8.Transportation maintenance 8.Transportation maintenance 9.Car insurance 9.Car insurance 10.Well/Piped water/ borehole/Meruwa 10.Well/Piped water/ borehole/Meruwa 11.Telephone 11.Telephone 12.Internet/Data 12.Internet/Data 13.Pest control 13.Pest control 14. Other taxes 14. Other taxes 15.Other expenditures 15.Other expenditures CODE 1: 1. CODE 1: 1. "}],"sieverID":"31114b18-97ce-4a6f-8170-a1a9882f4352","abstract":"for lower complaints made to suppliers when compared with the market vendors. Retailer-Client characteristics across market types showed more clients serviced by market vendors than neighbourhood vendors. However, clients received more services in terms of sorting, cleaning, discounts, and packaging in the neighbourhood. Again, while most of the neighborhood vendors transacted in their homes, market vendors used mainly roadside displays; with display items and cane baskets as the most important assets across the two market types. Labour use was low in both markets and neighborhood market vendors did not make use of hired labour. Neighbourhood vendors purchased inventory at a higher unit price than market vendors; an indication of poor economies of scale. Expectedly, revenue streams and cost of goods sold including business costs, inventory were higher in markets. Negative returns were witnessed across all market types, indicting non-profitable fruit and vegetable retailing enterprises."} \ No newline at end of file