IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/iaae12/126365.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Assessing the Impact of Agro-pastoral Programs on the Productivity of Farmers Organisations: The Case of Cameroon

Author

Listed:
  • Nguetse Tegoum, Pierre
  • Nakelse, Tebila
  • Ouedraogo, Issaka

Abstract

Between 2001 and 2007, the poverty headcount in Cameroon has remained steady around 40%. In fact, poverty has reduced in urban areas while it has increased of about 3 points in rural areas. This, despite the numerous agro-pastoral programs that were undertaken by the government between 2002 and 2008 in favour of rural people. The aim of this study is to assess the impact of these actions on the productivity of famers’ organisations. The methodology is based on a combined assessment approach combining both qualitative and quantitative aspects. The qualitative analysis uses Likert scale. The quantitative approach is based on Rubin's causal model and uses propensity score matching techniques. The main data used are those of the survey on the assessment of the impact of programs (EIPA) conducted by Ministry of Economy and Planning in 2009. The results obtained with both methods (qualitative and quantitative) are consistent and indicate that programs implemented by Cameroun government and donors between 2002 and 2008 have had a positive impact on the productivity of farmers’ organizations. The analysis of satisfaction, while indicating an overall appreciation of programs by leaders and members of Famers organisations (FOs), shows that the level of satisfaction seems to be negatively correlated with the regional level of poverty. The matching techniques revealed that FOs aid recipients have experienced a 4% increase in their productivity. More specifically, the study reveals that the impact of government programs is more important in the livestock sector (16%) and in the crops growing sector; it is quite null. Furthermore, non-beneficiaries organisations of the livestock sector could have had an increase of their productivity of about 10% if they had benefited from government assistance. The study therefore recommends that the government to (i) put more means in the livestock sector, which seems to be very promising and can emerge as an important growth leverage of Cameroon economy; (ii) revise the assistance strategies of FOs engaged in the agriculture sector by adopting more targeting approaches and, (iii) establish a monitoring –evaluation system.

Suggested Citation

  • Nguetse Tegoum, Pierre & Nakelse, Tebila & Ouedraogo, Issaka, 2012. "Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Assessing the Impact of Agro-pastoral Programs on the Productivity of Farmers Organisations: The Case of Cameroon," 2012 Conference, August 18-24, 2012, Foz do Iguacu, Brazil 126365, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:iaae12:126365
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.126365
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/126365/files/16407.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.126365?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. Alston, Julian M. & Wyatt, T. J. & Pardey, Philip G. & Marra, Michele C. & Chan-Kang, Connie, 2000. "A meta-analysis of rates of return to agricultural R & D: ex pede Herculem?," Research reports 113, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    2. Ravallion, Martin, 2008. "Evaluating Anti-Poverty Programs," Handbook of Development Economics, in: T. Paul Schultz & John A. Strauss (ed.), Handbook of Development Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 59, pages 3787-3846, Elsevier.
    3. Lorraine Dearden & Barbara Sianesi, 2001. "Estimating the Returns to Education: Models, Methods and Results," CEE Discussion Papers 0016, Centre for the Economics of Education, LSE.
    4. Gallant, A. Ronald, 1982. "Unbiased determination of production technologies," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 285-323, November.
    5. Jean-Paul Chavas & Thomas L. Cox, 1992. "A Nonparametric Analysis of the Influence of Research on Agricultural Productivity," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 74(3), pages 583-591.
    6. Ravallion, Martin & Datt, Gaurav, 1996. "How Important to India's Poor Is the Sectoral Composition of Economic Growth?," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 10(1), pages 1-25, January.
    7. Nanak Kakwani & Hyun H. Son, 2006. "How costly is it to achieve the Millennium Development Goal of halving poverty between 1990 and 2015?," Working Papers 19, International Policy Centre for Inclusive Growth.
    8. Delgado, Christopher L. & Narrod, Clare A. & Tiongco, Marites M. & Barros, Geraldo Sant'Ana de Camargo & Catelo, Maria Angeles & Costales, Achilles & Mehta, Rajesh & Naranong, Viroj & Poapongsakorn, N, 2008. "Determinants and implications of the growing scale of livestock farms in four fast-growing developing countries:," Research reports 157, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    9. James J. Heckman & Hidehiko Ichimura & Petra Todd, 1998. "Matching As An Econometric Evaluation Estimator," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 65(2), pages 261-294.
    10. Peter Timmer, C., 1988. "The agricultural transformation," Handbook of Development Economics, in: Hollis Chenery & T.N. Srinivasan (ed.), Handbook of Development Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 8, pages 275-331, Elsevier.
    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. Nguezet, Paul Martin Dontsop & Diagne, Aliou & Okoruwa, Victor Olusegun & Ojehomon, Vivian, 2011. "Impact of Improved Rice Technology (NERICA varieties) on Income and Poverty among Rice Farming Households in Nigeria: A Local Average Treatment Effect (LATE) Approach," Quarterly Journal of International Agriculture, Humboldt-Universitaat zu Berlin, vol. 50(3), pages 1-25.
    2. Agnes Quisumbing & Neha Kumar, 2011. "Does social capital build women's assets? The long-term impacts of group-based and individual dissemination of agricultural technology in Bangladesh," Journal of Development Effectiveness, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(2), pages 220-242.
    3. Birthal, Pratap S. & Roy, Devesh & Negi, Digvijay S., 2015. "Assessing the Impact of Crop Diversification on Farm Poverty in India," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 70-92.
    4. Begum, Ismat & Alam, Mohammad & Haque, M., 2015. "Productive Impacts of Cash Transfer and Conditional Cash Transfer Programs in Bangladesh: Propensity Score Matching Analysisi," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 211215, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    5. Cavatassi, Ramina & González-Flores, Mario & Winters, Paul & Andrade-Piedra, Jorge & Espinosa, Patricio & Thiele, Graham, 2016. "Linking smallholders to the new agricultural economy: The case of the plataformas de concertación in Ecuador," IFPRI book chapters, in: Devaux, André & Torero, Maximo & Donovan, Jason & Horton, Douglas E. (ed.), Innovation for inclusive value-chain development: Successes and challenges, chapter 12, pages 375-410, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    6. Del Prete, Davide & Ghins, Léopold & Magrini, Emiliano & Pauw, Karl, 2019. "Land consolidation, specialization and household diets: Evidence from Rwanda," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 139-149.
    7. Hazell, Peter B.R., 2009. "The Asian Green Revolution:," IFPRI discussion papers 911, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    8. Nkonya, Ephraim & Phillip, Dayo & Mogues, Tewodaj & Pender, John & Yahaya, Muhammed Kuta & Adebowale, Gbenga & Arokoyo, Tunji & Kato, Edward, 2008. "From the ground up: Impacts of a pro-poor community-driven development project in Nigeria," IFPRI discussion papers 756, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    9. Stephan Klasen, 2003. "In Search of The Holy Grail: How to Achieve Pro-Poor Growth ?," Ibero America Institute for Econ. Research (IAI) Discussion Papers 096, Ibero-America Institute for Economic Research.
    10. Thirtle, Colin & Lin, Lin & Piesse, Jenifer, 2003. "The Impact of Research-Led Agricultural Productivity Growth on Poverty Reduction in Africa, Asia and Latin America," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 31(12), pages 1959-1975, December.
    11. Digvijay S. Negi & Devesh Roy & Pratap Singh Birthal, 2015. "Agricultural Diversification and Poverty in India," Working Papers id:7486, eSocialSciences.
    12. Cazzuffi, Chiara & Pereira-López, Mariana & Soloaga, Isidro, 2017. "Local poverty reduction in Chile and Mexico: The role of food manufacturing growth," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 160-185.
    13. Leite, Phillippe & Narayan, Ambar & Skoufias, Emmanuel, 2011. "How do ex ante simulations compare with ex post evaluations ? evidence from the impact of conditional cash transfer programs," Policy Research Working Paper Series 5705, The World Bank.
    14. Rodriguez, Divina Gracia P. & Rejesus, Roderick M. & Aragon, Corazono T., 2007. "Impacts of an Agricultural Development Program for Poor Coconut Producers in the Philippines: An Approach Using Panel Data and Propensity Score Matching Techniques," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 32(3), pages 1-24, December.
    15. Maredia, Mywish K., 2009. "Improving the proof: Evolution of and emerging trends in impact assessment methods and approaches in agricultural development," IFPRI discussion papers 929, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    16. Duflo, Esther & Glennerster, Rachel & Kremer, Michael, 2008. "Using Randomization in Development Economics Research: A Toolkit," Handbook of Development Economics, in: T. Paul Schultz & John A. Strauss (ed.), Handbook of Development Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 61, pages 3895-3962, Elsevier.
    17. Jia, Xiangping, 2009. "Synergistic Green and White Revolution: Evidence from Kenya and Uganda," 2009 Conference, August 16-22, 2009, Beijing, China 51367, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    18. Birner, Regina & Davis, Kristin & Pender, John & Nkonya, Ephraim & Anandajayasekeram, Ponniah & Ekboir, Javier & Mbabu, Adiel & Spielman, David & Horna, Daniela & Benin, Samuel & Cohen, Marc J., 2006. "From "best practice" to "best fit": a framework for designing and analyzing pluralistic agricultural advisory services worldwide," FCND discussion papers 210, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    19. Ferraro, Paul J. & Miranda, Juan José, 2014. "The performance of non-experimental designs in the evaluation of environmental programs: A design-replication study using a large-scale randomized experiment as a benchmark," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 107(PA), pages 344-365.
    20. Timmer, Peter & Weisbrod, Julian & McCulloch, Neil, 2006. "The Pathways out of Poverty in Rural Indonesia: an empirical assessment," Proceedings of the German Development Economics Conference, Berlin 2006 29, Verein für Socialpolitik, Research Committee Development Economics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Community/Rural/Urban Development; Farm Management; Productivity Analysis; Public Economics;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ags:iaae12:126365. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iaaeeea.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.