Differential impacts of conservation agriculture technology options on household welfare in sub-Saharan Africa
J. Tambo and
No 277035, 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia from International Association of Agricultural Economists
Conservation agriculture (CA), which consists of minimum soil disturbance, crop residue retention and crop rotation, is claimed to generate a number of agronomic, economic and environmental benefits. Recognising these potential benefits, CA is widely promoted in efforts towards sustainable agricultural intensification. However, there has been an intense debate about its suitability in smallholder farming environments, and this has stimulated a growing interest in the adoption and impacts of CA technologies in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). Using survey data from rural households in nine SSA countries, this paper seeks to add to the extant literature by examining the drivers and welfare impacts of individual and combined implementation of the three components of CA. We employ inverse-probability-weighting regression-adjustment and propensity score matching with multiple treatment estimators. Results show that adoption of a CA technology significantly increases household income and income per adult equivalent. Disaggregating the CA components, we find that adoption of the components in combination is associated with larger income gains than when the components are adopted in isolation, and the largest effect is achieved when households implement the three practices jointly. We identify key factors that might spur increased adoption, including education, secure land rights, and access to institutional support services. Acknowledgement : This research was financially supported by the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ) through the research projects Promoting Food Security in Rural Sub-Saharan Africa: The Role of Agricultural Intensification, Social Security and Results-Oriented Approaches and Program of Accompanying Research for Agricultural Innovation (PARI) . This article draws on data from the Lund University led Afrint II project, which was funded by the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency and the Swedish Research Foundation. The authors gratefully acknowledge the team of researchers from Sweden and the nine African countries who were involved in the Afrint II project.
Keywords: Consumer/Household; Economics (search for similar items in EconPapers)
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-agr and nep-env
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations Track citations by RSS feed
Downloads: (external link)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:ags:iaae18:277035
Access Statistics for this paper
More papers in 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia from International Association of Agricultural Economists Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by AgEcon Search ().