Cotton’s Hidden Balance Sheet: Why Crop Residue Choices Matter for Farmers in Benin

The findings connect residue retention with higher returns and identify livestock penning, incorporation and manure application as promising options, giving farmers and agricultural advisers a clearer picture of the financial trade-offs involved.

The stalks and leaves left after harvest present cotton growers with a practical decision: clear them quickly, burn them, or put them back to work on the farm. In northern Benin, where depleted soils and expensive inputs put pressure on earnings, that choice can shape the return from a season's labour, with some methods offering a stronger financial case than others.

The research paper "Short-Term Economic Analysis of the Profitability of Different Crop Residue Management Practices in Cotton Production in Northern Benin," published in Sustainability, examines these choices using information from 225 farming households. The findings connect residue retention with higher returns and identify livestock penning, incorporation and manure application as promising options, giving farmers and agricultural advisers a clearer picture of the financial trade-offs involved.

Cotton earnings leave many families facing losses

Researchers surveyed households in four villages across Banikoara and Kandi between August and September 2025, comparing residue removal, burning, incorporation into soil, farmyard manure application, livestock penning and composting. They assessed net revenue per hectare, the benefit–cost ratio and returns per day of family labour, using 216 households for the main regressions and 207 for the analysis of profitability gaps because some records were incomplete.

Cotton production generated an average net revenue of about 103,276 West African CFA francs (FCFA) per hectare, with average yields near 1,494 kilograms per hectare. The average benefit–cost ratio was 1.33, meaning each franc spent generated roughly 1.33 francs in revenue. These averages concealed considerable hardship: 28.4% of farms recorded losses, and returns to family labour averaged 2,225 FCFA per person-day, below the local agricultural wage of 2,500 FCFA. Purchased inputs and hired labour were major expenses, making the cost of each management decision important.

Penning and incorporation show the clearest promise

Livestock penning involves keeping animals on fields so their manure is deposited directly onto the land, and trampling brings residues into closer contact with the soil. Compared with residue removal, penning was associated with approximately 180,040 FCFA more net revenue per hectare and a benefit–cost ratio higher by 0.474. It was the only individual practice for which the authors reported evidence of higher net revenue as well as a better benefit–cost ratio, suggesting financial promise where farmers can integrate livestock into cropping systems.

Incorporating residues into the soil was associated with a benefit–cost ratio higher by 0.573, the largest estimated increase among the individual practices. Manure application was linked to a 0.308 increase. Their estimated gains in net revenue were positive, with enough uncertainty to prevent a firm conclusion about that outcome. None of the individual practices showed a clear improvement in returns per labour day, an important consideration for households balancing cotton production with other demands on their time.

Burning and composting produced positive estimates across the profitability measures, with insufficient evidence of an advantage over removal during the season examined. Burning can save land-clearing labour; composting requires collection, preparation, transport and application, with benefits potentially taking longer to emerge. Earlier literature cited by the authors links repeated burning to soil and nutrient losses, effects that this survey of short-term financial returns could not assess directly.

Retaining residues is linked to higher overall returns

In the comparison of retention and non-retention households, farmers using incorporation, manure, penning or composting earned approximately 47,776 FCFA more net revenue per hectare. Their benefit–cost ratio was higher by 0.187, and returns to family labour were higher by about 1,288 FCFA per person-day. Around 61% of surveyed households retained residues, and adopters applied retention practices to an average of 43% of their cultivated land, showing that uptake often covered only part of a farm.

A separate regression estimated that retention was associated with roughly 450 kilograms more cotton per hectare, 174,564 FCFA more net revenue, a 0.48 higher benefit–cost ratio and 5,910 FCFA more per labour day. These estimates come from a different model than the group-average comparison. An analysis called the Blinder–Oaxaca decomposition attributed most of the profitability gaps to differences in returns from farmers' observed characteristics, with little attributed to differences in those characteristics themselves. The authors interpret this as evidence that management matters, a plausible explanation that the analysis cannot confirm directly.

Possible explanations include improved moisture retention, reduced erosion and gradual nutrient release. Tests involving fertiliser use and draft animals offered little clear evidence that retention changed the returns from those inputs; small negative interactions appeared for herbicide use.

Farmer circumstances mattered too: older age was associated with lower profitability across all three measures, and access to credit was linked to around 39,719 FCFA more net revenue per hectare. In the practice-level model, Kandi farmers earned about 137,238 FCFA less per hectare than those in Banikoara, with a benefit–cost ratio lower by 0.453.

Practical support must fit farmers' local conditions

The researchers recommend field demonstrations of incorporation and penning, alongside credit for inputs, draft animals and light tillage equipment. Machinery hire services could make residue incorporation more accessible and ease labour constraints, particularly for older farmers.

Their recommendations favour workable alternatives to burning over outright bans, with additional attention to Kandi's weaker returns. Education, training, extension contact, farm size and household-head gender showed no clear independent association with profitability in the main models, supporting the case for combining advice with access to finance, equipment and markets.

The findings describe one production season in four deliberately selected villages, with households randomly sampled within them, which limits how widely the results can be applied. Farmers chose their own practices, leaving soil quality, labour availability and management ability as possible influences on the observed differences.

Soil carbon, nutrient balances, emissions and long-term yield stability were not measured, and monetary figures reflect 2025 prices without inflation adjustments. Following farms over several seasons, or testing practices experimentally, would help establish whether the financial advantages persist and how they relate to lasting improvements in soil health.