..........................
2.2. Mechanical Drying Systems’ different Approach
Cocoa beans are manly dried using direct sun drying method in Cameroon. It is so far themost convenient and traditional way of drying. However, with an increase demand by overseascustomers for good quality of cocoa beans, producers should perhaps think of turning into a newdrying system such as mechanical drying.
Less common than natural drying, mechanical drying is used by many Cameroonianproducers, we can distinguish:
Static dryers (Fig5/6): they are often used in plantations. This is a platform consisting of awire mesh or a perforated plate under which is pulsed hot air from a heat exchanger generator,fueled either fuel oil or wood. Fuel is increasingly used for reasons of convenience of use andtemperature control. A more advanced system consists in circulating a remover-mower (shaftequipped with pallets or fingers) animated by a rotation movement or not. This system avoids thecaking of cocoa bean, especially in the wet phase of drying (60 to 30% of water), makes itpossible to homogenize the mass, and no longer requires handling, the cocoa beans are evacuatedto the end of the dryer. These static dryers are generally of low cost, they are found further south,it is important to work on a layer thickness as high as possible to economically dry the product.(In general, the layer is 30 to 40 cm). However, this type of mechanical dryer is especially usefulwhen the product to be dried out fermentation, in addition to solar drying. The air attacktemperature must not exceed 60 ° C to 65 ° C so that the acidity of the beans remains low. Inpractice, producers are trying to get closer to solar drying. Air velocities should be slow (0.4 m /s to 0.5 m / s), and 55% to 7% drying should last at least 20 h, that is, drying time should notexceed 2.5% per hour. It shows a cocoa bean with low humidity, low acidity, no impurities, andnot moldy.
.......................
CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY......................... 19
3.1. Description of the study area................. 19
3.2 Research Design...............20
CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS .......................... 28
4.1 Socio Economic Characteristics of farmers............................. 28
4.2. Determinants of adoption and use intensity of MDS ........................ 30
CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................. 36
CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
4.1. Socio Economic Characteristics of farmers
Table 3 presents the socioeconomic attributes of selected variables by the district andadoption category. The results show that the level of education of the household head issignificantly higher for farmers in Obala I (9.8 years) district than in other districts (Table 3).The results show that adopters are distinguishable in terms of household characteristics such asage, education, and household size. Adopters have a higher level of education of 9.9 years thannon-adopters who have an average of 7.5 years (Table 3). This helps farmers better understandthe importance of adopting modern agricultural technologies. Education is hypothesized to havea positive impact on technology adoption (Huffman, 2001). This is consistent with theexpectation that the probability of adopting new agricultural technologies such as MDS increaseswith the level of education of the household head due to greater awareness of the availability andbenefits of new agricultural technologies. Education not only facilitates adoption but alsoenhances productivity, especially among adopters of improved technology. Adopters are alsorelatively younger than
