IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/zbw/espost/301788.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing the adoption rates of improved technology in traditional poultry farming: evidence from rural Togo

Author

Listed:
  • Soviadan, Mawussi Kossivi
  • Kubik, Zaneta
  • Enete, Anselm Anibueze
  • Okoye, Chukwuemeka Uzoma

Abstract

The adoption of improved agricultural technologies is known to significantly improve incomes, create more wealth, alleviate poverty, and contribute to rural development in many developing countries. The Government of Togo, through the National Programme for Agricultural Investment and Food Security (PNIASAN) and the Agricultural Sector Support Project (PASA), with financial support from the World Bank and help from the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), assist smallholder farmers in improved technology adoption in traditional poultry farming (ITTPF) for wealth creation, food security, and poverty alleviation. However, for any technology or emerging agricultural practices, awareness and exposure are necessary for adoption. And because these two factors are not distributed randomly in the population of potential adopters, not taking them into account will lead to estimates of population adoption rates that are not informative of the actual demand for the technology and inconsistent estimates of the parameters of the adoption model. In this study, we evaluate the adoption rates of ITTPF among farmers in Togo. Data was collected from 400 farmers in 2014, before the introduction of ITTPF, and again five years later. This data was then analyzed using inverse propensity score weighting and parametric estimation of adoption regression models. The results of the estimates indicate that the average treatment effect (𝐴𝑇𝐸), which represents the mean potential adoption rate of the population, is 57%, the average treatment effect on the treated (𝐴𝑇𝐸𝑇), which represents the mean potential adoption rate in the exposed subpopulation, is 60%, the population mean joint exposure and adoption rate (𝐽𝐸𝐴) is 13%, and the population selection bias (𝑃𝑆𝐵) is 3%. The sample adoption rate (𝐽𝐸𝐴) implies a population adoption gap of -47% due to a lack of exposure and adoption by a sufficient population size. The 𝑃𝑆𝐵 is insignificant and indicates that all the sampled farmers had an almost equal opportunity to adopt ITTPF. The study reveals that the sample adoption rate does not consistently estimate the actual population adoption rate. Hence, controlling for non-exposure and selection biases is a prerequisite to acquiring consistent estimates of ITTPF adoption rates. The findings indicate a relatively high supply-demand gap for ITTPF that justifies investment in its further dissemination and adoption in Togo for optimal positive impact on potential outcomes and the welfare of farmers.

Suggested Citation

  • Soviadan, Mawussi Kossivi & Kubik, Zaneta & Enete, Anselm Anibueze & Okoye, Chukwuemeka Uzoma, 2022. "Assessing the adoption rates of improved technology in traditional poultry farming: evidence from rural Togo," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 17(3), pages 206-223.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:espost:301788
    DOI: 10.53936/afjare.2022.17(3).14
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/301788/1/Soviadan_2022.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.53936/afjare.2022.17(3).14?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James J. Heckman & Edward Vytlacil, 2005. "Structural Equations, Treatment Effects, and Econometric Policy Evaluation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 73(3), pages 669-738, May.
    2. Ariel Ortiz-Bobea & Toby R. Ault & Carlos M. Carrillo & Robert G. Chambers & David B. Lobell, 2021. "Anthropogenic climate change has slowed global agricultural productivity growth," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 11(4), pages 306-312, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. P.A.V.B. Swamy & I-Lok Chang & Jatinder S. Mehta & William H. Greene & Stephen G. Hall & George S. Tavlas, 2016. "Removing Specification Errors from the Usual Formulation of Binary Choice Models," Econometrics, MDPI, vol. 4(2), pages 1-21, June.
    2. González-Uribe, Juanita & Reyes, Santiago, 2021. "Identifying and boosting “Gazelles”: Evidence from business accelerators," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 139(1), pages 260-287.
    3. Wong, Maisy, 2010. "The Relationship between Marginal Willingness-to-Pay in the Hedonic and Discrete Choice Models," MPRA Paper 51218, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Victor Chernozhukov & Iván Fernández‐Val & Blaise Melly, 2013. "Inference on Counterfactual Distributions," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 81(6), pages 2205-2268, November.
    5. Manuel Arellano & Stéphane Bonhomme, 2017. "Quantile Selection Models With an Application to Understanding Changes in Wage Inequality," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 85, pages 1-28, January.
    6. Zhang, Yang & Zhang, Yan & Gao, Yan & McLaughlin, Neil B. & Huang, Dandan & Wang, Yang & Chen, Xuewen & Zhang, Shixiu & Liang, Aizhen, 2024. "Effects of tillage practices on environment, energy, and economy of maize production in Northeast China," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 215(C).
    7. Martínez-Iriarte, Julián & Montes-Rojas, Gabriel & Sun, Yixiao, 2024. "Unconditional effects of general policy interventions," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 238(2).
    8. Nir Billfeld & Moshe Kim, 2024. "Context-dependent Causality (the Non-Nonotonic Case)," Papers 2404.05021, arXiv.org.
    9. Timothy B. Armstrong & Michal Kolesár, 2021. "Sensitivity analysis using approximate moment condition models," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 12(1), pages 77-108, January.
    10. Hoderlein, Stefan & Su, Liangjun & White, Halbert & Yang, Thomas Tao, 2016. "Testing for monotonicity in unobservables under unconfoundedness," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 193(1), pages 183-202.
    11. Dillon, Andrew & Friedman, Jed & Serneels, Pieter, 2014. "Health Information, Treatment, and Worker Productivity: Experimental Evidence from Malaria Testing and Treatment among Nigerian Sugarcane Cutters," IZA Discussion Papers 8074, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    12. Chunrong Ai & Oliver Linton & Kaiji Motegi & Zheng Zhang, 2021. "A unified framework for efficient estimation of general treatment models," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 12(3), pages 779-816, July.
    13. Huber Martin & Wüthrich Kaspar, 2019. "Local Average and Quantile Treatment Effects Under Endogeneity: A Review," Journal of Econometric Methods, De Gruyter, vol. 8(1), pages 1-27, January.
    14. David Card & David S. Lee & Zhuan Pei & Andrea Weber, 2015. "Inference on Causal Effects in a Generalized Regression Kink Design," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 83, pages 2453-2483, November.
    15. Christian Belzil, 2008. "Testing the Specification of the Mincer Wage Equation," Annals of Economics and Statistics, GENES, issue 91-92, pages 427-451.
    16. Anna Aizer & Joseph J. Doyle, 2015. "Juvenile Incarceration, Human Capital, and Future Crime: Evidence from Randomly Assigned Judges," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 130(2), pages 759-803.
    17. Ivan A Canay & Magne Mogstad & Jack Mount, 2024. "On the Use of Outcome Tests for Detecting Bias in Decision Making," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 91(4), pages 2135-2167.
    18. Stefano Pinardi & Matteo Salis & Gabriele Sartor & Rosa Meo, 2023. "EU−Africa: Digital and Social Questions in a Multicultural Agroecological Transition for the Cocoa Production in Africa," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-29, July.
    19. Yusuke Narita, 2018. "Toward an Ethical Experiment," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 2127, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    20. Halbert White & Karim Chalak, 2013. "Identification and Identification Failure for Treatment Effects Using Structural Systems," Econometric Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(3), pages 273-317, November.

    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:zbw:espost:301788. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/zbwkide.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.