IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sag/seajad/v12y2015i1p19-33.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Expert Elicitation for Assessing Agricultural Technology Adoption: The Case of Improved Rice Varieties in South Asian Countries

Author

Listed:
  • Takuji W. Tsusaka

    (International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT) International Rice Research Institute)

  • Ma. Lourdes Velasco

    (International Rice Research Institute (IRRI))

  • Takashi Yamano

    (International Rice Research Institute)

  • Sushil Pandey

    (International Rice Research Institute)

Abstract

Cultivar-specific adoption information is imperative for agricultural research organizations to make strategic research plans for crop-genetic development. However, such data are often unavailable in developing countries or obsolete and unreliable even when they exist. A budget-friendly and reliable method of tracking and monitoring varietal adoptions is highly desired. In this paper, we employ expert elicitation (EE) as a method to obtain estimates of modern variety (MV) adoption of rice in Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Nepal, and Sri Lanka. EE is conducted by comparing information from EE assessment and household surveys. We found that organized panels of agricultural experts can provide reliable estimates of the area planted to MVs. In addition, cultivar-specific adoption estimates are reliable for dominant varieties. To some extent, EE estimates are more precise when estimates are calculated by aggregating disaggregate-level elicitations than by directly obtaining aggregate-level elicitations. Furthermore, the household surveys reveal that it takes approximately a decade for a new variety to be adopted by a significant number of farmers.

Suggested Citation

  • Takuji W. Tsusaka & Ma. Lourdes Velasco & Takashi Yamano & Sushil Pandey, 2015. "Expert Elicitation for Assessing Agricultural Technology Adoption: The Case of Improved Rice Varieties in South Asian Countries," Asian Journal of Agriculture and Development, Southeast Asian Regional Center for Graduate Study and Research in Agriculture (SEARCA), vol. 12(1), pages 19-33, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:sag:seajad:v:12:y:2015:i:1:p:19-33
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ajad.searca.org/article?p=490
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Keijiro OTSUKA & Kaliappa P. KALIRAJAN, 2006. "Rice Green Revolution In Asia And Its Transferability To Africa: An Introduction," The Developing Economies, Institute of Developing Economies, vol. 44(2), pages 107-122, June.
    2. Flores, Benito E, 1986. "A pragmatic view of accuracy measurement in forecasting," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 14(2), pages 93-98.
    3. Shankar Basu & Roger G. Schroeder, 1977. "Incorporating Judgments in Sales Forecasts: Application of the Delphi Method at American Hoist & Derrick," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 7(3), pages 18-27, May.
    4. Rowe, Gene & Wright, George, 1999. "The Delphi technique as a forecasting tool: issues and analysis," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 15(4), pages 353-375, October.
    5. Norman Dalkey & Olaf Helmer, 1963. "An Experimental Application of the DELPHI Method to the Use of Experts," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 9(3), pages 458-467, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Nakano, Yuko & Tsusaka, Takuji W. & Aida, Takeshi & Pede, Valerien O., 2018. "Is farmer-to-farmer extension effective? The impact of training on technology adoption and rice farming productivity in Tanzania," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 336-351.
    2. Ochieng, Justus & Schreinemachers, Pepijn & Ogada, Maurice & Dinssa, Fekadu Fufa & Barnos, William & Mndiga, Hassan, 2019. "Adoption of improved amaranth varieties and good agricultural practices in East Africa," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 187-194.
    3. Pepijn Schreinemachers & Teresa Sequeros & Saima Rani & Md. Abdur Rashid & Nithya Vishwanath Gowdru & Muhammad Shahrukh Rahman & Mohammed Razu Ahmed & Ramakrishnan Madhavan Nair, 2019. "Counting the beans: quantifying the adoption of improved mungbean varieties in South Asia and Myanmar," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 11(3), pages 623-634, June.
    4. Samal, Parshuram & Mondal, Biswajit & Jambhulkar, Nitiprasad Namdeorao & Verma, Ramlakhan & Das, Anup Kumar & Singh, Onkar Nath, 2023. "Evaluation of crop research institutes under data and resource constraints: An alternative approach," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    5. Djokoto, Justice Gameli & Afari-Sefa, Victor, 2017. "Alternative functional forms for technology choice: Application to cocoa production technologies," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 110-120.
    6. Malabayabas, Maria Luz L. & Mishra, Ashok K. & Pede, Valerien O., 2023. "Joint decision-making, technology adoption and food security: Evidence from rice varieties in eastern India," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    7. Andersen Onofre, Kelsey F. & Forbes, Gregory A. & Andrade-Piedra, Jorge L. & Buddenhagen, Chris E. & Fulton, James C. & Gatto, Marcel & Khidesheli, Zurab & Mdivani, Rusudan & Xing, Yanru & Garrett, Ka, 2021. "An integrated seed health strategy and phytosanitary risk assessment: Potato in the Republic of Georgia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    8. Pavithra, S. & Mittal, S. & Bhat, S.A. & Birthal, P.S. & Shah, S.A. & Hariharan, V., 2017. "Spatial and Temporal Diversity in Adoption of Modern Wheat Varieties in India," Agricultural Economics Research Review, Agricultural Economics Research Association (India), vol. 30(1), June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Marcin Kozak & Olesia Iefremova, 2014. "Implementation Of The Delphi Technique In Finance," "e-Finanse", University of Information Technology and Management, Institute of Financial Research and Analysis, vol. 10(4), pages 36-45, May.
    2. Prommer, Lisa & Tiberius, Victor & Kraus, Sascha, 2020. "Exploring the future of startup leadership development," Journal of Business Venturing Insights, Elsevier, vol. 14(C).
    3. Prianto Budi Saptono & Gustofan Mahmud & Intan Pratiwi & Dwi Purwanto & Ismail Khozen & Muhamad Akbar Aditama & Siti Khodijah & Maria Eurelia Wayan & Rina Yuliastuty Asmara & Ferry Jie, 2023. "Development of Climate-Related Disclosure Indicators for Application in Indonesia: A Delphi Method Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(14), pages 1-25, July.
    4. Di Zio, Simone & Bolzan, Mario & Marozzi, Marco, 2021. "Classification of Delphi outputs through robust ranking and fuzzy clustering for Delphi-based scenarios," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    5. Alyami, Saleh. H. & Rezgui, Yacine & Kwan, Alan, 2013. "Developing sustainable building assessment scheme for Saudi Arabia: Delphi consultation approach," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 43-54.
    6. Georg Aichholzer, 2002. "Das ExpertInnen-Delphi: methodische Grundlagen und Anwendungsfeld ‘Technology Foresight‘ (The Expert Delphi: Methodology and Application in 'Technology Foresight')," ITA manu:scripts 02_01, Institute of Technology Assessment (ITA).
    7. Hayes, Tom, 2007. "Delphi study of the future of marketing of higher education," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 60(9), pages 927-931, September.
    8. Haarhaus, Tim & Liening, Andreas, 2020. "Building dynamic capabilities to cope with environmental uncertainty: The role of strategic foresight," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    9. Ribeiro, Barbara E. & Quintanilla, Miguel A., 2015. "Transitions in biofuel technologies: An appraisal of the social impacts of cellulosic ethanol using the Delphi method," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 53-68.
    10. Yeh, Duen-Yian & Cheng, Ching-Hsue, 2015. "Recommendation system for popular tourist attractions in Taiwan using Delphi panel and repertory grid techniques," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 164-176.
    11. Hsin-Ke Lu & Sung-Chun Tsai & Peng-Chun Lin & Kuo-Chung Chu & Alexander N. Chen, 2020. "Toward a New Real-Time Approach for Group Consensus: A Usability Analysis of Synchronous Delphi System," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 29(2), pages 345-370, April.
    12. Torres-Sibille, Ana del Carmen & Cloquell-Ballester, Vicente-Agustín & Cloquell-Ballester, Víctor-Andrés & Artacho Ramírez, Miguel Ángel, 2009. "Aesthetic impact assessment of solar power plants: An objective and a subjective approach," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 13(5), pages 986-999, June.
    13. Laura Studen & Victor Tiberius, 2020. "Social Media, Quo Vadis? Prospective Development and Implications," Future Internet, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-22, August.
    14. Volkmar, Gioia & Fischer, Peter M. & Reinecke, Sven, 2022. "Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning: Exploring drivers, barriers, and future developments in marketing management," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 599-614.
    15. Kawamoto, Carlos Tadao & Wright, James Terence Coulter & Spers, Renata Giovinazzo & de Carvalho, Daniel Estima, 2019. "Can we make use of perception of questions' easiness in Delphi-like studies? Some results from an experiment with an alternative feedback," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 296-305.
    16. Meijering, Jurian Vincent & Tobi, Hilde, 2018. "The effects of feeding back experts’ own initial ratings in Delphi studies: A randomized trial," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 216-224.
    17. Paméla Baillette & Bernard Fallery, 2016. "La méthode du Delphi argumentaire, une innovation managériale dans le cadre d'un projet complexe," Post-Print hal-02160359, HAL.
    18. Förster, Bernadette & von der Gracht, Heiko, 2014. "Assessing Delphi panel composition for strategic foresight — A comparison of panels based on company-internal and external participants," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 215-229.
    19. Torres Sibille, Ana del Carmen & Cloquell-Ballester, Víctor-Andrés & Cloquell-Ballester, Vicente-Agustín & Darton, Richard, 2009. "Development and validation of a multicriteria indicator for the assessment of objective aesthetic impact of wind farms," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 40-66, January.
    20. Ebrahim Aghazadeh & Hasan Yildirim & Murat Kuruoglu, 2022. "A Hybrid Fuzzy MCDM Methodology for Optimal Structural System Selection Compatible with Sustainable Materials in Mass-Housing Projects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-22, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    expert elicitation; modern variety; household survey; technology adoption; rice; South Asia;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C81 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - Methodology for Collecting, Estimating, and Organizing Microeconomic Data; Data Access
    • O13 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Agriculture; Natural Resources; Environment; Other Primary Products
    • Q16 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - R&D; Agricultural Technology; Biofuels; Agricultural Extension Services

    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:sag:seajad:v:12:y:2015:i:1:p:19-33. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Benedict A. Juliano (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/searcph.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.