Which Parts of the Value Chain Matter for Somali Agribusiness? What a 2025 Study Reveals
...
A digest of Sheikh Ali, Farow & Mohamud (2025), Journal of Asian Scientific Research
Agricultural value chains run from input supply through production, processing, marketing and distribution. In Somalia, each link faces its own constraints — costly or poor-quality inputs, weak storage and processing capacity, fragmented markets and insecure transport routes. This 2025 study surveys 400 value-chain actors to ask which of these links are most closely associated with agribusiness performance, and whether performance and household livelihood assets in turn connect those links to income, food security, employment and resilience. It combines Porter's value chain analysis with the Sustainable Livelihoods Framework and will interest policymakers, development practitioners and agribusiness researchers.
The survey covered 400 value-chain actors. Marketing is the component most strongly linked to performance (β = .429), input supply has a negative path to performance (β = −.216), and the model explains R² = .887 of the variance in livelihood outcomes.
Article at a Glance
The article is "Impact of agribusiness value chain components on agribusiness performance and livelihood outcomes: An integrated analysis using Porter's value chain and the sustainable livelihoods framework," by Ali Yassin Sheikh Ali (SIMAD University), Mohamed Adan Ali Farow (Skillful Academy) and Zeinab Abdirahman Mohamud (SIMAD University). It was published in the Journal of Asian Scientific Research, Vol. 15, No. 3, pp. 476–509 (AESS Publications), in 2025 (received 28 April; accepted 25 August; published 17 September). Its research area is agricultural economics, value chains and rural livelihoods, and its study context is Somalia: Afgoye, Balcad, Mogadishu, Jowhar and Beledweyne, with farmers, processors, traders and transporters. The method is a cross-sectional survey (5-point Likert scales) analysed with exploratory factor analysis and PLS-SEM (SmartPLS 4) with mediation analysis. The DOI is https://doi.org/10.55493/5003.v15i3.5593.
The Research Problem
Most value-chain research, the authors argue, comes from stable settings that assume reliable inputs, working markets and strong institutions — conditions that rarely hold in Somalia. Much of it also treats agribusiness performance as an end point, rather than asking whether performance is the channel through which value-chain improvements reach household welfare.
Research Objective
The study examines how five value-chain components relate to agribusiness performance and, through performance and livelihood assets, to livelihood outcomes. It tests four hypotheses. H1 holds that value-chain components (input supply, production, processing, marketing, logistics) improve agribusiness performance. H2 holds that agribusiness performance mediates the link between value-chain components and livelihood outcomes. H3 holds that agribusiness performance improves livelihood outcomes. H4 holds that livelihood assets mediate the link between performance and livelihood outcomes.
How the Study Was Conducted
A quantitative, cross-sectional survey of 400 value-chain actors, described as selected by stratified random sampling across value-chain roles and answering a self-administered, pretested questionnaire. Each construct was measured with three Likert items; the study received ethical approval from SIMAD University's review board.
The analysis followed six steps. In step 01, Sample, respondents were Afgoye 42% and Balcad 31.8%; 87% were male, 50% had no formal education and 67% were farmers. In step 02, Factor analysis, exploratory factor analysis confirmed the intended groupings of items. In step 03, Reliability, Cronbach's alpha and composite reliability were above 0.70, and all VIFs were below 2.1. In step 04, Validity, AVE was above 0.50, and the Fornell–Larcker and HTMT (< 0.85) criteria were met. In step 05, Structural model, direct paths to performance, livelihood assets and outcomes were estimated (SmartPLS 4). In step 06, Mediation, indirect effects were tested through performance and through livelihood assets.
Key Findings
The results come from Tables 27–28 of the article, and all paths have p < .05. The path from performance to outcomes has β = 0.428, and the path from assets to outcomes has β = 0.554. R² is .829 for performance, .915 for assets and .887 for outcomes. For each value-chain component, the direct path to performance, the indirect effect via performance and the indirect effect via assets are as follows. Input supply has −0.216, −0.093 and −0.070. Production has 0.277, 0.118 and 0.135. Processing has 0.192, 0.082 and 0.207. Marketing has 0.429, 0.184 and 0.200. Logistics and distribution has 0.420, 0.180 and 0.190.
Marketing and logistics show the strongest links to performance. Production and processing are also positively associated; H1 is rated partially accepted because of input supply.
Input supply carries a negative coefficient. The authors attribute this to inefficient or costly inputs in Somalia. The sign appears only when all five components are modelled together (see limitations).
Performance and assets both connect value chains to livelihoods. Every component has significant indirect effects through performance (H2) and through livelihood assets, and performance relates directly to outcomes (H3).
Reading note: H4 concerns assets mediating the performance–outcomes link, but the model contains no path from performance to assets; the evidence offered is value-chain components → assets → outcomes, and the conclusion describes assets as moderators. The demographic table is also identical to that of the authors' companion paper in Research on World Agricultural Economy (2025), which is not cited and describes sampling differently.
What the Study Contributes
The contribution is primarily empirical: it breaks the value chain into five components and estimates how each relates to performance and livelihoods in a conflict-affected economy, complementing the authors' companion analysis of performance and assets. The authors recommend investment in roads, warehousing and transport, better input-supply systems and quality incentives, wider access to education and finance, conflict-sensitive programming, training, cooperatives and value-added processing.
Important Limitations
Identified by the authors: The cross-sectional design limits causal claims. The mix of locations limits generalisability, and longitudinal work and attention to technology, gender and policy are recommended.
Skilful cautions arising from the study design: Input supply correlates positively with performance (HTMT .41–.43), so its negative path may be a statistical suppression effect among overlapping predictors. All constructs are self-rated by the same respondents, and R² values of .83–.92 are unusually high, consistent with common-method bias. A self-administered questionnaire is hard to reconcile with a sample in which 50% have no formal education. Finally, the two papers appear to draw on one dataset, so they are best read together.
Why This Research Matters
For programme designers, the results suggest that market access and logistics are the value-chain links most closely tied to performance, and that input programmes need attention to quality and cost rather than volume alone.
Skilful Research Insight
Editorial commentary — not a finding of the study. Three lessons stand out. First, when one predictor flips sign in a multi-predictor model, check its simple correlation before building a story around it. Second, make the model match each hypothesis: a mediation claim needs the specific paths it names. Third, when several papers draw on one survey, say so and cite each other — it strengthens the evidence base rather than weakening it. Future work could track the same actors over time and add objective measures such as input prices, sales volumes and household food-consumption scores.
Read the Original Research
The original article is "Impact of agribusiness value chain components on agribusiness performance and livelihood outcomes: An integrated analysis using Porter's value chain and the sustainable livelihoods framework," published in the Journal of Asian Scientific Research, 15(3), 476–509 (2025), by Ali Yassin Sheikh Ali, Mohamed Adan Ali Farow and Zeinab Abdirahman Mohamud. Its DOI is https://doi.org/10.55493/5003.v15i3.5593, and the publisher/journal page is AESS Publications, www.aessweb.com. Skilful summarises; all findings belong to the original authors.
SEO Information
The SEO title is "Agribusiness Value Chains and Livelihoods in Somalia: 2025 Study Summary." The meta description is "A Skilful digest of a 2025 PLS-SEM study of 400 Somali value-chain actors on how inputs, production, processing, marketing and logistics shape livelihoods." The URL slug is /agribusiness-value-chain-components-somalia. The primary keyword is agricultural value chains in Somalia. The secondary keywords are agribusiness performance; livelihood outcomes; Porter value chain; sustainable livelihoods framework; PLS-SEM mediation.