|**Table 37 Real E**<br>**Export Crop Far**|**xport Crop Rev**<br>**mers**_(in 1985 C_|**enue of House**<br>_FAF peryear)_|**holds Classi**|**fied As**|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|_Region_|_Cocoa_|_Coffee_|_Cotton_|_Total_|
|East Forest|||||
|1993|21492|3801|18|25311|
|1995|25702|13414|0|39116|
|West Forest|||||
|1993|22905|8305|506|31716|
|1995|24738|19493|6638|50869|
|Savannah|||||
|1993|5156|3484|21592|302322|
|1995|3173|4297|20615|208085|

Disaggregating households according to their primary source of export crop revenue reveals some interesting differences within regions that help to explain the apparent inconsistency between the increase in export crop earnings and the increase in household expenditures. Looking first at the East Forest, we find that household expenditures per capita increased by 10 percent among the group of households whose primary source of export revenue is cocoa (table 3 8). Cocoa revenues increased 27 percent among these households, and mean cocoa revenues in 1993 were 31 percent of household expenditure per capita. So the magnitude of the increase in per capita household expenditure is roughly what one expect.

The story for coffee farmers, however, is less consistent. Among the group of households whose primary source of revenue is from coffee, export crop revenues increased by 151 percent, primarily from coffee, and accounted for 19 percent of household expenditure in 1993. However, household expenditure per capita declined by 3 percent. Poverty declined among this group, however, suggesting that the decline in expenditure was more pronounced at the upper end of the expenditure distribution. The group of coffee farmers raises the mean export crop earnings while bringing down the mean expenditure increase for the region as a whole. So the puzzling finding is why expenditure went down among the group of coffee farmers, even though coffee revenues and total export crop earnings more than doubled.

Inconsistencies also exist among cotton farmers in the Savannah. In cotton-growing households, there is a 19 percent increase in cotton revenue, and a 24 percent increase in household expenditure, a much bigger increase than would be expected given that cotton revenue is equal to 44 percent of household expenditure. Hence the question is what accounts for the large rise in household expenditure among Savannah cotton farmers.

While the slight decline in export crop earnings among export crop farmers in the Savannah is due partly to the decline in the export earnings of the non cotton-growing export crop farmers, it also reflects the fact that the number of export farmers for whom cotton is the primary source of export crop revenue declines as a share of the total export crop household population from 61.4 percent in 1993 to 49.2 percent in 1995 (table 38). These results are mirrored if we look at all Savannah households growing cotton, not just export crop households. Mean cotton revenue per capita among the households growing cotton actually increased, but the cotton growing population declined from 27.1 to 16.5 percent (table 36). Thus, mean cotton revenue in the region declined. This decline in mean cotton revenue in the region is unexpected, as since real cotton prices went up by about 23 percent, whereas cotton production declined by about 12 percent between the 1992/93 and the 1994/95 campaigns. This would imply about an 8 percent increase in total cotton revenues. The decline in mean regional revenues suggests that cotton farmers were undersampled. However, some decline in the cotton-growing 40