IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jafrec/v20y2011i4p562-595.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is Agricultural Extension Helping the Poor? Evidence from Rural Mozambique

Author

Listed:
  • Benedito Cunguara
  • Karl Moder

Abstract

Mozambique remains predominantly poor. The official statistics show that poverty incidence barely changed from 54% in 2002-03 to 55% in 2008-09, which stands way above the government's target of 45% by the year 2009. This places the country off-target to cut hunger and poverty by half by 2015, despite an annual economic growth of about 7% in the period 1994-2010. In rural areas, poverty levels have slightly increased, due to the underperformance of the agricultural sector. Extension services can have a significant impact on poverty reduction through stimulating growth in agricultural productivity. Based on a nationally representative household survey from Mozambique, this paper uses three econometric models, namely an OLS regression, the doubly robust estimator and matching and regression to estimate the economic impact of receipt of extension. The results suggest that the receipt of extension increases farm incomes by 12%. However, rather than crafting resource-poor technologies, extension services tend to target wealthier households who are relatively more likely to adopt the existing technologies. This might increase income inequality. The impact of extension, and therefore its contribution to poverty reduction, can be enhanced through several mechanisms (e.g., programme design and the number of staff). Copyright 2011 , Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Benedito Cunguara & Karl Moder, 2011. "Is Agricultural Extension Helping the Poor? Evidence from Rural Mozambique," Journal of African Economies, Centre for the Study of African Economies, vol. 20(4), pages 562-595, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:jafrec:v:20:y:2011:i:4:p:562-595
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/jae/ejr015
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:jafrec:v:20:y:2011:i:4:p:562-595. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/csaoxuk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.