th5_rural media, agricultural technology adoption and productivity: evidence from smallholder...

Rural media, agricultural technology adoption andproductivity: Evidence from smallholder rice farmers in

Burkina Faso

Alia D., Nakelse T., Diagne A., Ouedraogo M., Guissou R.

Presenter :Tebila, NakelseAfrica Rice Congress, 2013

Africa Rice Center (AfricaRice)

October, 2013

Alia D., Nakelse T., Diagne A., Ouedraogo M., Guissou R. Presenter :Tebila, Nakelse Africa Rice Congress, 2013 (Africa Rice Center (AfricaRice))Rural media, agricultural technology adoption and productivity: Evidence from smallholder rice farmers in Burkina FasoOctober, 2013 1 / 18

Introduction

Introduction

Agriculture accounts up to 40 percent to the total GPD and up to 60percent to export revenue and remains a major source of income

Productivity increase rely mainly on area expansion which is gettingbecause of

I The demographic pressure due to population and urbanizationI Climate change

Thus, raising productivity through adoption of improved varietiesalong with best crop management practices and mechanization couldbe a sustainable option

However, the diffusion and the adoption of most of these technologiesare still incomplete and even low in Africa (Abdulai and Huffman,2007)


Introduction

Introduction

Among the ICTs, radio is one the fastest for communicatingagricultural information. It has been used as extension tool sinceseveral years (Bereh, 2002).

Radio have been quite successful in spreading agricultural informationin several countries such as Brazil and Cote d’Ivoire (Dimelu andAnyawu, 2004 ; Wele 1991)

This paper proposes to contribute to the growing literature andempirically examines the effect of ICT use on the adoption ofimproved rice varieties and productivity


Theoretical framework and methods Rural media and the Rubin Causal Model

Rural media and the Rubin Causal Model

Let denote decision variable by D and by D = 1 if the farmer adoptand D = 0 if he do not adopt with following selection rule (SeeHeckman , 2010 ; Heckman et al 2006) : D = 1(µD(Z ) > V )

I µD(Z ) = Utility gain with adoptionI V a random scalar variable with cumulative distribution function FV

Farmer also faces two hypothetical or potential outcomesI Y1 = µ1(X ) + U1 under adoptionI Y0 = µ0(X ) + U0 without adoption with

X a subset of observed covariates andUD an error term.



Rural media and the Rubin Causal Model

How do Radio rice programs listening (W ) affect adoption ?First rural media affects adoption and hence the outcome bymodifying the information set of the decision maker

Second, it could also increase the knowledge of an adopting or even anon-adopting farmer about how to correctly use an existing improvedrice variety which has a complex input use requirement.



Average Treatmnet Effect (ATE )

Individual level effect of adoption on outcome : Y1 − Y0 = β

Population level effect : ATE (x) = β̄(x) = E (Y1 − Y0|X = x), ATTand ATU

BUTFarmer decision to adopt or not to adopt is likely to be endogenous ;farmer with expected high gain may sort into adoption (Diagne et al,2012 ; Ravaillon, 2012)



Local Average Treatment Effect (LATE )

To consider the unobserved characteristics effect we use MarginalTreatment Effect (MTE) version of LATE with listening rice radioprogram (W ) as instrument .

I MTE (u) = E (Y1 − Y0|X = x ,U = u)

I LATE (p1, p0,X = x) =∫ p

p MTE (u)du/(p1 − p0)

p1 is the probability of adoption when farmer listened rice radioprogram(W = 1)

p0 is the probability of adoption when farmer not listened rice radioprogram(W = 0)

Thus LATE is the mean effect on outcome (productivity) for farmerwho choose to adopt because of listening rice radio program.


Data and descriptive statistics Data

Data

The data set for this analysis is extracted from the rice statisticssurvey for Burkina Faso collected in 2009-2010 by NARS incollaboration with NASS and AfricaRice

Stratification at province level with villages randomly selected in eachstratum proportionally to the importance of the stratum and a fixednumber of rice farming households selected in each village

The size of sample drawn was originally 760 . The number ofhouseholds effectively surveyed was 650 in Burkina Faso.

Thus the final data used have 284 households.



Descriptive Statistics

Descriptive Statistics by adoption statusNo Yes Diff tstata

Quantitative variablesLogarithm of Rice yield in 2008 (Kg/Ha) 0.69 0.88 -0.19 -2.4**Household size 9.4 9.13 0.28 0.3Number of radio receptors 1.88 1.52 0.36 2.0**Categorical variablesHave listened rice programs on radio 0.1 0.42 -0.33 -4.0***Have acquired some knowledge 0.02 0.4 -0.37 -4.7**Have applied knowledge acquired 0.02 0.36 -0.34 -4.3***Gender of Head of household 0.76 0.8 -0.04 -0.5Has secondary Activity 0.13 0.06 0.06 1.4Has agriculture as main activity 0.93 0.95 -0.02 -0.5Has at least some primary education 0.33 0.42 -0.09 -1Sample size 242 42




Descriptive Statistics by listening statusNo Yes Diff tstata

Quantitative variablesLogarithm of Rice yield in 2008 (Kg/Ha) 0.83 0.88 -0.05 -0.9Household size 9.45 8.7 0.75 1.2Number of radio receptors 1.46 1.72 -0.26 -2.1**Categorical variablesHave listened rice programs on radioHave acquired some knowledge 0.01 0.91 -0.9 -15.5***Have applied knowledge acquired 0.01 0.82 -0.82 -14.4***Gender of Head of household 0.77 0.83 -0.06 -1.2Has secondary Activity 0.07 0.08 -0.01 -0.3Has agriculture as main activity 0.95 0.93 0.02 0.5Has at least some primary education 0.34 0.51 -0.16 -2.7***Sample size 106 178




On average the yield is 19% higher for adopters

The percentage of household that have listened rice program on radiois significantly higher in the group of improved varieties adopter

Actual adoption rate is significantly higher in the group of farmer thathave listened rice program on radio

This might suggest a positive association between having listened riceprogram on radio and improved varieties adoption

In fact there is no significant difference between the yield of farmerthat have listened rice program on radio and the farmers that have


Results and discussion Impact of media use on improved variety adoption

Impact of media use on improved variety adoption

The propensity to adopt improved varieties is higher for a farmer thathave listen rice program on radio than for a farmer that have never

Most of the other control variables have the expected sign but werefound to be not significant


Results and discussion Impact of media use on improved variety adoption

Marginal Treatment Effect

Figure : MTEAlia D., Nakelse T., Diagne A., Ouedraogo M., Guissou R. Presenter :Tebila, Nakelse Africa Rice Congress, 2013 (Africa Rice Center (AfricaRice))Rural media, agricultural technology adoption and productivity: Evidence from smallholder rice farmers in Burkina FasoOctober, 2013 13 / 18

Results and discussion Impact of media use on rice productivity

Impact of media use on rice productivity

The graph shows that the MTE is decreasing in the unobserved utilityand consequently in the propensity score

This is an evidence of diminishing marginal return with the likelihoodof a farmer to adopt a modern variety

Farmer with the highest return are more likely to adopt ( low ud )while those that are less likely to adopt ( high ud ) have a muchsmaller gross return

This arises the fact that farmers almost certainly base their choice toadopt or not adopt on things they know but the analyst does notknow

This gives rise to what Heckman et al. (2006) call essentialheterogeneity



Local Average Treatment Effect



Impact of media use on rice productivity

The total gross return of adoption is positive and relatively high forall potential adoption farmers

In the sub-group of farmers who listened rice program the averageimpact of adoption (the LATE ) is statistically significant andestimated to be an increase of about 39.2% of yield

This is the mean effect on yield for farmer who choose to adoptbecause of listening rice radio program.

The LATE for the actual non-adopters is significantly positive whichsuggests that if the actual non adopter were all exposed to riceprograms on radio and come to adopter improved varieties, their yieldgain will be positive and much higher than the average yield gainacross all adopting farmers


Results and discussion Conclusion

Conclusion

We use household-level survey data and apply the Rubin CausalModel that has emerged as the standard approach for evaluatingpolicy/program effect using observational data.

Adoption of modern varieties in 2008 was significantly higher forfarmers that had listened to the radio program on rice before 2008than those who had not

Using of rural radio appears to significantly increase the propensity ofadopting modern varieties

We also estimate that the LATE of adoption of improved varietiesinduced by listening to the rice radio program on rice yield wassignificant and positive


Results and discussion Conclusion

Thank you !


th5_￼￼rural media, agricultural technology adoption and productivity: evidence from smallholder...

Technology

th5_rural media, agricultural technology adoption and productivity: evidence from smallholder...