VALUE CHAIN #
Millet annual growth rates, 1979-94.
| Area (%/yr) | Yield (%/yr) | Production (%/yr) | Per caput production (%/yr) | ||
| Developing countries | 0.3 | 0.4 | 0.6 | -1.4 | |
| Africa | 4.1 | -0.6 | 3.4 | 0.6 | |
| Northern Africa | 2.7 | -2.7 | -0.1 | -2.6 | |
| Sudan | 2.7 | -2.7 | -0.2 | -2.5 | |
| Western Africa | 4.7 | -0.4 | 4.2 | 1.2 | |
| Burkina Faso | 3.8 | 2.0 | 5.9 | 3.0 | |
| Ghana | 0.7 | 3.0 | 3.7 | 0.4 | |
| Côte d’Ivoire | 2.6 | 2.5 | 5.2 | 1.3 | |
| Mali | 5.1 | -1.0 | 4.0 | 2.3 | |
| Niger | 3.9 | -1.0 | 2.8 | -1.3 | |
| Nigeria | 7.7 | -2.3 | 5.2 | 2.2 | |
| Senegal | 0.1 | 1.4 | 1.5 | -1.4 | |
| Togo | 3.5 | -1.5 | 1.9 | -1.2 | |
| Central Africa | 3.6 | -1.3 | 2.3 | 0.0 | |
| Cameroon | -6.1 | 3.3 | -3.0 | -5.8 | |
| Chad | 5.4 | -0.5 | 4.8 | 2.0 | |
| Eastern Africa | 0.5 | -0.1 | 0.4 | -2.4 | |
| Ethiopia | 1.1 | 0.8 | 1.8 | -1.0 | |
| Kenya | 3.7 | -2.4 | 1.2 | -2.3 | |
| Tanzania | -2.0 | -2.4 | -4.4 | -7.3 | |
| Uganda | 2.3 | 0.5 | 2.8 | -0.5 | |
| Zimbabwe | -1.6 | -2.6 | -4.2 | -7.2 | |
| Southern Africa | 5.9 | -4.5 | 1.1 | -1.8 | |
| Asia | -2.4 | 1.5 | -0.9 | -2.8 | |
| Near East | -2.0 | -3.1 | -5.0 | -7.7 | |
| Far East | -2.4 | 1.5 | -0.9 | -2.7 | |
| China | -6.1 | 1.8 | -4.5 | -5.8 | |
| India | -1.8 | 2.7 | 0.9 | -1.2 | |
| Myanmar | 0.5 | 1.5 | 2.0 | -0.2 | |
| Nepal | 4.6 | 1.5 | 6.2 | 3.5 | |
| Pakistan | -1.8 | -1.2 | -3.0 | -6.3 | |
| Central America and the Caribbean | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | |
| South America | -12.5 | 2.3 | -10.5 | -12.2 | |
| Argentina | -12.5 | 2.3 | -10.5 | -11.8 | |
| Developed countries | -0.3 | 0.4 | 0.1 | -0.9 | |
| Australia | 0.6 | -0.5 | 0.2 | -1.3 | |
| United States | 4.3 | -0.1 | 4.3 | 3.3 | |
| CIS1 | -0.6 | 0.2 | -0.3 | -2.0 | |
| World | 0.3 | 0.4 | 0.7 | -1.1 | |
Until 1991, area of the former USSR.
Source: FAO
Africa is the only region where millet production is growing, having risen from 8 million to over 11 million tons between 1979-81 and 1992-94 (Table 1). Most of the increase in production, however, occurred during the first half of the 1980s and has since been sustained by area expansion, mainly in the Sahel and to a smaller extent in other countries.
For many African countries, millet yields have remained stagnant or fallen, partly because much of the expansion has been into areas with poor soils and low, erratic rainfall. Overall, millet production has grown slightly faster than population with ‘per caput production increasing by 0.6 percent per annum between 1979 and 1994. However, this situation is likely to be reversed in the near future.
In a number of countries, consumption levels of millet have been maintained only through area expansion. Even so, most millet production areas remain food-insecure. As land constraints become more severe, it is imperative that productivity of this key staple is increased to ensure at least minimal food security.
Developed countries
The only millet producer of any significance in the developed countries is the CIS. Millet production rose sharply during the 1980s as a result of large increases in productivity (from 0.63 to 0.86 t/ha between 1979-81 and 1989-91). However, subsequent developments were similar to those in China.
In the Russian Federation, for example, production levels were supported by prices unrelated to production costs and determined by production quotas set by the government. When price setting was discontinued and quotas abolished, the market collapsed. Land was shifted from millet to wheat and other grains. Millet output dropped from 2.3 million tons in 1989 to 482,000 tons in 1994.
Kazhakastan traditionally produced millet mainly for export to other parts of the former USSR. When this trade disappeared during the early 1990s, following declining demand, production fell from 1.0 million tons to 300,000 tons per annum.
Production constraints
Millet production in the developing world, particularly in Africa, suffers from a number of constraints – poor soil fertility, low and erratic rainfall, high temperatures, widespread Striga infestation, downy mildew disease and loss of grain to birds.
Population pressures have led to a shortening of fallow periods, which in turn has accelerated the decline in soil fertility. These processes have also prompted the expansion of millet into more marginal lands. The impact is evident in the declining yields of millet in the major producing countries in Africa (Niger, Mali, Nigeria) over the past 15 years. Similar trends are also evident in the harsher millet production environments in Asia (e.g., western Rajasthan in India).
In addition, millets are cultivated on small, fragmented production units and are often intercropped (usually with legumes and sometimes with sorghum or maize).
Unreliable precipitation tends to keep the use of inputs such as chemical fertilizer, pesticides and hired labour to a minimum; and limited commercial demand depresses the incentive to use purchased inputs.
Crop improvement is generally more difficult in millet than in most other crops, largely because of the nature of the environment in which they are grown (see section on Technological Change). National millet improvement programmes began much later and remained weaker than those for many other crops.
Budgets for millet breeding research are low in most countries. Moreover, almost no experience has been acquired on millet breeding in developed countries that could be transferred to developing countries, as has been done for wheat and maize. Among the different types of millet only pearl millet, and to a small extent finger millet, has so far been researched at the international level. Where new technologies for crop and resource management have been developed, adoption has been poor, partly because of inadequate extension, but, equally, because farmers in harsh environments are generally more risk-averse than their counterparts in more favourable environments. The returns from investing labour and capital in millet production may be lower than the gains derivable from such investments in other farm and non-farm enterprises. Further, many new technologies may not be properly tailored to farmers’ severely resource-constrained circumstances.
Varietal improvement
Hybrid breeding programmes have traditionally targeted the relatively better environments, although even these environments are harsher than those for most other crops. Hybrid grain cultivars have been developed for pearl millet in India and the United
States, but perform best in areas where rainfall is reliable. In drier areas with more erratic rainfall, it is far more difficult and time-consuming for breeders to identify dual-purpose grain/stover combinations that are superior across a range of growing conditions. For these areas, crop breeders have concentrated on developing open-pollinated varieties that give stable grain and straw yields and suit the prevailing rainfall pattern, rather than on attempting to maximize yield potential under more favourable conditions.
Grain yields of improved cultivars grown with low to moderate inputs can exceed those of local landraces by about 20 percent; an even more important advantage is that they often mature earlier, and thus perform better under terminal drought stress. However, the adoption of improved varieties remains poor outside a few countries, such as China (foxtail millet), the CIS (proso millet), India (pearl millet) and the United States (proso, foxtail and pearl millets). For example, in Niger, the world’s fourth largest producer, improved varieties account for only 5 percent of the millet area, in part because the seed multiplication and distribution system is inadequate.
Utilization
Although millet represents less than 2 percent of world cereal utilization, it is an important staple in a large number of countries in the semi-arid tropics, where low precipitation and poor soils limit the cultivation of other major food crops.
Millet utilization is mostly confined to the developing countries, even more so after production and utilization fell sharply in the CIS, the largest producer in the developed world. Accurate data are not available for most countries, but it is estimated that about 80 percent of the world’s millet (and over 95 percent in Asia and Africa) is used as food, the remainder being divided between feed (7 percent), other uses (seed, beer, etc.,) and waste.
Millet utilization by type, region and selected countries, 1992-94 average.
| Direct food (‘000 tons) |
Feed (‘000 tons) |
Other uses1 (‘000 tons) |
Total (‘000 tons) |
Per caput food use (kg/yr) | ||
| Developing countries | 21776 | 966 | 3767 | 26509 | 5.08 | |
| Africa | 8673 | 187 | 2328 | 11188 | 13.40 | |
| Burkina Faso | 683 | 2 | 126 | 811 | 68.52 | |
| Chad | 217 | 0 | 41 | 258 | 33.73 | |
| Ethiopia | 108 | 0 | 153 | 260 | 1.97 | |
| Mali | 658 | 3 | 119 | 781 | 74.63 | |
| Niger | 1440 | 17 | 259 | 1716 | 162.45 | |
| Nigeria | 3315 | 100 | 1155 | 4570 | 31.50 | |
| Senegal | 505 | 5 | 83 | 593 | 61.61 | |
| Sudan | 364 | 20 | 76 | 460 | 14.14 | |
| Tanzania | 177 | 2 | 53 | 233 | 6.41 | |
| Uganda | 517 | 20 | 95 | 633 | 25.93 | |
| Asia | 13103 | 748 | 1433 | 15284 | 4.17 | |
| China | 3277 | 327 | 257 | 3861 | 2.74 | |
| India | 9216 | 283 | 1100 | 10599 | 10.23 | |
| Central America and the Caribbean | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.00 | |
| South America | 0 | 31 | 6 | 37 | 0.00 | |
| Developed countries | 513 | 970 | 323 | 1805 | 0.40 | |
| North America | 0 | 180 | 0 | 180 | 0.00 | |
| Europe | 0 | 4 | 1 | 5 | 0.00 | |
| CIS | 504 | 736 | 316 | 1555 | 1.73 | |
| Oceania | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0.00 | |
| World | 22289 | 1936 | 4090 | 28314 | 4.00 | |
For seed, manufacturing purposes and waste.
Source: FAO
Food use
Per caput food consumption of millet varies greatly between countries; it is highest in Africa, where millet is a key food staple in the drier regions. Millet represents about 75 percent of total cereal food consumption in Niger and over 30 percent in most other countries in the Sahel. It is also important in Namibia (25 percent of total cereal food consumption) and Uganda (20 percent).
Outside Africa, millet food consumption is important in parts of India, China and Myanmar. Utilization is negligible in Latin America, the Caribbean and all the developed countries. The exception was the former USSR until the late 1980s. However, under the economic transition process and the removal of price subsidies, utilization in the USSR/CIS fell sharply.
Millet is a high-energy, nutritious food, especially recommended for children, convalescents and the elderly. Several food preparations are made from millet, which differ between countries and even between different parts of a country. These consist primarily of porridge or pancake-like flat bread. However, because wholemeal quickly goes rancid, millet flour (prepared by pounding or milling) can be stored only for short periods.
Millet is traditionally pounded in a mortar, but mechanical dehulling and milling are increasingly used since they eliminate a considerable amount of hard labour and generally improve the quality of the flour.
Worldwide, millet food consumption has grown only marginally over the past 30 years, while total food use of all cereals has almost doubled. Millet is nutritionally equivalent or superior to other cereals2. However, consumer demand has fallen because of a number of factors, including changing preferences in favour of wheat and rice (cheap imports are available in several countries), irregular supplies of millet, rising incomes and rapid urbanization. Particularly in urban environments, the opportunity cost of women’s time has encouraged the shift from millet to readily available processed foods (milled rice, wheat flour, etc.,) that are far quicker and more convenient to prepare.
Protein contents in pearl, proso and foxtail millets are comparable with those in wheat, barley and maize. Finger millet has a slightly lower protein content, but is in fact nutrition-ally superior because the protein quality is generally as good or better than in other cereals. Finger millet is also high in calcium and iron, and contains fairly high levels of methionine, a major limiting amino acid in many tropical cereals.]
Animal feed
Utilization of millet grain as animal feed is not significant. It is estimated that less than 2 million tons, (about 7 percent of total utilization), is fed to animals, compared with about 30 million tons of sorghum (almost half of total output). In the developing countries, use of millet grain for animal feed is concentrated in Asia; very little is fed in Africa. However, millet fodder and stover are a valuable and critical resource in the crop/livestock systems where millet is grown.
Feed use estimates are heavily influenced by assumptions made for China, the world’s third largest producer. In fact, little reliable information is available on feed use in this country. Based on very rough calculations of feed use in the CIS, it is estimated that about 1.0 million tons per annum are currently used as animal feed in the developed countries (Table 3). Western Europe, North America and Japan together use slightly over 200,000 tons, almost exclusively as bird seed. Recent increases in the use of pearl millet as a lower-cost substitute for maize feed in aquaculture and dairy and poultry farming in India and the southeastern United States are not well documented, and, in any case, at the moment represent only a small fraction of overall feed grain utilization.
Feeding trials have shown that pearl millet grain compares favourably with maize and sorghum as a high-energy, high-protein ingredient in feed for poultry, pigs, cattle and sheep. Nevertheless, very little millet is used as feed. First, as millet is grown mostly on marginal lands and production is barely sufficient to satisfy food requirements, little surplus is left for animal feed. Second, millet production fluctuates widely from year to year because of rainfall variability and drought in the main production areas. This deters a closer integration of millet production with intensive livestock operations. Third, millet yields are generally lower than those of other crops produced commercially in more favourable environments. Thus, production and transport costs are often prohibitive compared to alternative ingredients of compound feeds.
Other uses
There are few other uses of millet. Small quantities of finger millet are used in Zimbabwe for commercial brewing and opaque beer. Food technologists have experimented with the incorporation of pearl millet into composite flour, but the commercial application of this technology is limited. http://www.fao.org/docrep/w1808e/w1808e0e.htm#TopOfPage
International trade, market prices and stocks
Global trade in millet is estimated to range between 200,000 and 300,000 tons (Table 4a and b), representing roughly 0.1 percent of world trade in cereals or 1.0 percent of world millet production. The major exporters are India, the United States, Argentina and China, which together supply about two-thirds of recorded exports. A sizeable proportion (about 100,000 tons) of the recorded international trade is in proso millet, exported by the United States, Argentina and Australia to other developed countries. Another 60,000 tons are pearl millet exports by India. In recent years, China has started to export some quantities of foxtail millet.
The magnitude of officially recorded trade has marginally declined over the past 20-30 years, and there has been a slight change in direction. Imports by developed countries have tended to decrease over the past two decades, while those by the developing countries remained steady through the 1960s, rose during the 1970s, but fell thereafter, having been replaced by rising imports of wheat and rice. Developed countries now account for an estimated 70 percent of recorded world imports, compared with about 50 percent during the early 1960s.
Millet recorded international trade: exports.
| Exports | 1979-81 (‘000 tons) |
1989-91 (‘000 tons) |
1992-94 (‘000 tons) |
|
| Africa | 57.9 | 26.4 | 20.2 | |
| Mali | 0.02 | 15.0 | 18.0 | |
| Niger | 36.7 | 0.1 | 0.0 | |
| Sudan | 2.1 | 1.3 | 0.0 | |
| Asia | 12.0 | 16.8 | 84.6 | |
| China | 8.7 | 4.6 | 21.6 | |
| India | 0.0 | 7.0 | 58.5 | |
| North, Central and South America, and the Carribean | 145.9 | 119.1 | 90.3 | |
| Argentina | 112.9 | 41.0 | 42.9 | |
| United States | 33.0 | 75.5 | 45.5 | |
| Europe | 20.5 | 33.0 | 43.7 | |
| EC (12 countries)3 | 15.6 | 22.6 | 28.3 | |
| Hungary | 4.4 | 6.9 | 13.0 | |
| Oceania | 14.6 | 13.6 | 16.3 | |
| Australia | 14.6 | 13.6 | 16.3 | |
| World | 250.9 | 208.7 | 255.0 | |
| Developing countries | 181.9 | 84.0 | 147.4 | |
| Developed countries | 69.0 | 124.7 | 107.6 | |
Each figure is a 3-year average for the respective period, e.g., 1979-81.
Shown as zero for trade less than 50 tons.
Including intra-trade among member countries.
Source: FAO
Millet recorded international trade: imports.
| Imports | 1979-81 (‘000 tons) |
1989-91 (‘000 tons) |
1992-94 (‘000 tons) |
|
| Africa | 82.0 | 7.9 | 40.9 | |
|
|
Angola | 0.02 | 0.0 | 21.7 |
| Côte d’Ivoire | 0.0 | 2.6 | 1.2 | |
| Gabon | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.1 | |
| Mauritania | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | |
| Mali | 40.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | |
| Niger | 8.0 | 2.4 | 0.5 | |
| Nigeria | 26.7 | 0.5 | 0.0 | |
| Senegal | 0.0 | 2.1 | 15.0 | |
| Sudan | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.3 | |
| Zimbabwe | 0.2 | 0.0 | 0.3 | |
| Asia | 58.9 | 40.3 | 44.3 | |
|
|
Japan | 53.1 | 23.7 | 20.3 |
| Kuwait | 1.1 | 0.3 | 0.5 | |
| Malaysia | 0.7 | 2.1 | 2.4 | |
| Saudi Arabia | 1.4 | 1.5 | 2.8 | |
| Singapore | 0.4 | 1.1 | 0.7 | |
| Thailand | 0.8 | 1.7 | 1.8 | |
| North, Central and South America and the Caribbean | 4.0 | 26.2 | 18.1 | |
| Brazil | 3.8 | 3.7 | 5.8 | |
| Canada | 0.0 | 5.9 | 8.2 | |
| Europe | 145.7 | 145.5 | 155.4 | |
| Austria | 2.3 | 1.2 | 0.8 | |
| EC (12 countries)3 | 114.9 | 131.5 | 145.2 | |
| Switzerland | 26.0 | 9.2 | 8.2 | |
| Oceania | 0.8 | 0.8 | 5.7 | |
| World | 291.4 | 220.8 | 264.3 | |
| Developing countries | 90.5 | 43.8 | 75.4 | |
| Developed countries | 201.0 | 177.0 | 188.8 | |
- Each figure is a 3-year average for the respective period, e.g., 1979-81.
- Shown as zero for trade less than 50 tons.
- Including intra-trade among member countries.
Source: FAO
Note: The discrepancies between imports and exports are largely because some exporting countries do not report millet sales at all, or include them under “other cereals”.
International trade in millet is controlled by a few specialized trading companies and generally conducted on a sample basis. Only Argentina is reported to have established official export quality standards. International prices are highly volatile, determined largely by supply volumes, and are usually unrelated to those of other major coarse grains such as maize, sorghum or barley. Quotations are not regularly published or recorded according to official statistics. Table below therefore compares export prices for millet in Argentina, Australia and the United States. The high degree of price variability among suppliers, even in the same year, is due to the “thin” market, with small trade volumes and very few buyers and sellers.
International quotations are published in the Public Ledger, London, for UK imports and in STAT (Stat Publishing, Blaine, WA 98230, BC, Canada) for Argentine and US exports.]
Since millet yields in the major exporting countries are substantially lower than for other cereals, and taking into consideration the opportunity cost of growing millet rather than other crops, prices have to be considerably higher to make cultivation remunerative. As a result, prices are generally higher than those of other grains, except in India, where millet and sorghum prices are roughly equal. These prices discourage the use of millet in compound feed. Only on rare occasions when prices are extremely low is millet used as a substitute for sorghum or maize in feed formulations.
Average annual export prices for millet.
| Year | Argentina (US$/ton) | United States (US$/ton) | Australia (US$/ton) |
| 1979-81 average | 129 | 186 | 224 |
| 1983 | 147 | 175 | 251 |
| 1984 | 166 | 176 | 254 |
| 1985 | 107 | 171 | 210 |
| 1986 | 139 | 151 | 195 |
| 1987 | 108 | 154 | 162 |
| 1988 | 123 | 173 | 110 |
| 1989 | 190 | 177 | 249 |
| 1990 | 143 | 188 | 318 |
| 1991 | 107 | 156 | 249 |
| 1992 | 114 | 170 | 249 |
| 1993 | 156 | 223 | 245 |
| 1994 | 228 | 254 | 325 |
Source: FAO
World millet stocks, currently estimated at 3.0 million tons, are relatively unimportant in the global cereal context. They represent only 1.0 percent of world cereal carryover stocks. Most non-commercial stocks are held by farmers (but not officially recorded) in developing countries for household consumption, seed and limited trading on local markets. Such stocks, while critical in terms of food security at household or local level, are not significant in terms of global trade.
Most millets have excellent storage properties and can be kept for up to 4-5 years even in simple storage facilities, such as traditional granaries. This is because the seeds are protected from insect attack by the hard hull covering the endosperm, and because grain is usually harvested and stored in dry weather conditions. Thus, although there may be large year-to-year variations in production, stocks can easily be built up after favourable years.
http://www.fao.org/docrep/w1808e/w1808e0f.htm#TopOfPage
Processing Technologies for Finger Millet #
Milling
Generally, finger millet is pulverized to flour for preparation of food products. First it is cleaned to remove foreign materials such as stones, chaffs, stalks etc. then passed through abrasive or friction mills to separate out glumes (non-edible cellulosic tissue) and then pulverized. Normally it is pulverized in stone mill or iron disc or emery coated disc mills. Sometimes pearling or decortications are used to dehusk the finger millet grain; it results in pulverization of both the seed coat and endosperm. Hence finger millet is invariably pulverized along with seed to prepare whole meal. Centrifugal sheller can also be used to dehull/decorticate the small millets.
Decortication
This is a very recent process developed for finger millet. It is also known as debranning. This method is used for debranning of all cereals, but it is not effective for finger millet owing to its seed coat intactly attached to fragile endosperm. However hydrothermal processing is used to decorticate finger millet this involves (hydration, steaming and drying) which hardens the endosperm of grain and enables it to withstand mechanical impact. The decorticated finger millet could be cooked as such as rice is cooked.
Popping
Popping is one of the traditional methods to prepare popped finger millet flour. In this process millet is mixed with 3-5% additional water to raise the moisture content tempered for 2-4 hrs. and then popped by high temperature and short time (HTST) treatment by agitation in sand to about 230°C.This process results in development of highly desirable aroma because of Millard reaction between sugars and amino acids. Popped finger millet is a precooked ready to eat product. Also it can be pulverized and mixed with protein rich sources to prepare ready nutritious supplementary food. However, popping contaminates the product with particles of sand which is used as a heat transfer media and thus affects its eating quality. To overcome this drawback air popping in a suitable mechanical device has been successfully explored. But this method lacks the characteristics aroma compared to that using sand. Popped finger millet can be prepared at household community or at industrial level.
Malting
Malting of finger millet is commonly practiced for specialty foods. During this process bioavailability of proteins, carbohydrates and minerals are enhanced. Some B-group vitamins are synthesized and concentration of anti-nutritional factors is also reduced. Malting involves soaking of viable seeds in water to hydrate and to facilitate sprouting. These sprouts are then kiln dried. Finally, the rootlets are separated from the grain manually by rubbing with hand. All these operations influence the quality of malt. Seed germination is most important step because during this process the hydrolytic enzymes are developed these cause endosperm modification and increases nutritional properties. Malting of finger millet has been successfully utilized for developing various health foods such as infant food, weaning food, milk based beverages and confectionary products. https://www.omicsonline.org/open-access/technological-processing-and-nutritional-approach-of-finger-millet-eleusine-coracana–a-mini-review-2157-7110-1000593.php?aid=74355
