IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v190y2021ics0921800921002391.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The determinants of common bean variety selection and diversification in Colombia

Author

Listed:
  • Botero, Hernan
  • Barnes, Andrew P.
  • Perez, Lisset
  • Rios, David
  • Ramirez-Villegas, Julian

Abstract

Variety selection and diversification are climate change adaptation practices pursued by Colombian common bean producers. We investigate the drivers behind common bean variety selection and diversification in one of the most important common bean production regions in Colombia —Santander. The effects of climate change on this region are expected to be elevation driven. Exploiting the relationship between elevation-driven weather variations and climate change perception in Santander, we estimate an alternative-specific conditional logistic regression model to identify the determinants of common bean variety selection from a survey of producers. Using an ordered-logistic regression model, we also investigate the drivers behind common bean variety diversification within this farming community. We find that farms' elevation, household composition, and seed certification are some of the most important drivers behind farmers' common bean variety selection in Santander. We also find that varieties that sell at higher prices and have shorter vegetative cycles tend to be more preferred by farmers. Finally, farmers who receive more help from family members and own a tractor tend to grow more than one variety in the same production cycle. Common bean breeding programmes can exploit these drivers to design communication strategies to maximize uptake of newly developed common bean phenotypes.

Suggested Citation

  • Botero, Hernan & Barnes, Andrew P. & Perez, Lisset & Rios, David & Ramirez-Villegas, Julian, 2021. "The determinants of common bean variety selection and diversification in Colombia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:190:y:2021:i:c:s0921800921002391
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2021.107181
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800921002391
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2021.107181?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
    ---><---

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Barry Smit & Mark Skinner, 2002. "Adaptation options in agriculture to climate change: a typology," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 7(1), pages 85-114, March.
    2. repec:cup:judgdm:v:6:y:2011:i:6:p:552-564 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Feola, Giuseppe & Binder, Claudia R., 2010. "Towards an improved understanding of farmers' behaviour: The integrative agent-centred (IAC) framework," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(12), pages 2323-2333, October.
    4. Julian Ramirez-Villegas & Mike Salazar & Andy Jarvis & Carlos Navarro-Racines, 2012. "A way forward on adaptation to climate change in Colombian agriculture: perspectives towards 2050," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 115(3), pages 611-628, December.
    5. Anton Eitzinger & Peter Läderach & Christian Bunn & Audberto Quiroga & Andreas Benedikter & Antonio Pantoja & Jason Gordon & Michele Bruni, 2014. "Implications of a changing climate on food security and smallholders’ livelihoods in Bogotá, Colombia," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 161-176, February.
    6. Luchini, S. & Watson, V., 2014. "Are choice experiments reliable? Evidence from the lab," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 124(1), pages 9-13.
    7. Shaosheng Jin & Bashiru Mansaray & Xin Jin & Haoyang Li, 2020. "Farmers’ preferences for attributes of rice varieties in Sierra Leone," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 12(5), pages 1185-1197, October.
    8. Louviere,Jordan J. & Hensher,David A. & Swait,Joffre D. With contributions by-Name:Adamowicz,Wiktor, 2000. "Stated Choice Methods," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521788304.
    9. John Herbert Ainembabazi & Johnny Mugisha, 2014. "The Role of Farming Experience on the Adoption of Agricultural Technologies: Evidence from Smallholder Farmers in Uganda," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 50(5), pages 666-679, May.
    10. Mahadevan, Renuka & Asafu-Adjaye, John, 2015. "Exploring the potential for green revolution: a choice experiment on maize farmers in Northern Ghana," African Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, African Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 10(3), pages 1-15.
    11. Asrat, Sinafikeh & Yesuf, Mahmud & Carlsson, Fredrik & Wale, Edilegnaw, 2010. "Farmers' preferences for crop variety traits: Lessons for on-farm conservation and technology adoption," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(12), pages 2394-2401, October.
    12. Hassan, Rashid M. & Nhemachena, Charles, 2008. "Determinants of African farmers’ strategies for adapting to climate change: Multinomial choice analysis," African Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, African Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 2(1), pages 1-22, March.
    13. Khonje, Makaiko & Manda, Julius & Alene, Arega D. & Kassie, Menale, 2015. "Analysis of Adoption and Impacts of Improved Maize Varieties in Eastern Zambia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 695-706.
    14. Sichilima, Timothy & Mapemba, Lawrence & Tembo, Gelson, 2016. "Drivers of Dry Common Beans Trade in Lusaka, Zambia: A Trader’s Perspective," Sustainable Agriculture Research, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 5(2).
    15. Singh, Inderjit & Squire, Lyn & Strauss, John, 1986. "A Survey of Agricultural Household Models: Recent Findings and Policy Implications," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 1(1), pages 149-179, September.
    16. Kuhberger, Anton & Schulte-Mecklenbeck, Michael & Perner, Josef, 2002. "Framing decisions: Hypothetical and real," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 89(2), pages 1162-1175, November.
    17. Kelvin J. Lancaster, 1966. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74, pages 132-132.
    18. Asfaw, Solomon & McCarty, Nancy & Lipper, Leslie & Arslan, Aslihan & Cattaneo, Andrea, 2013. "Adaptation to Climate Change and Food Security: Micro-evidence from Malawi," 2013 Fourth International Conference, September 22-25, 2013, Hammamet, Tunisia 161646, African Association of Agricultural Economists (AAAE).
    19. Henao, Felipe & Viteri, Juan P. & Rodríguez, Yeny & Gómez, Juan & Dyner, Isaac, 2020. "Annual and interannual complementarities of renewable energy sources in Colombia," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    20. Anton Eitzinger & Claudia R. Binder & Markus A. Meyer, 2018. "Risk perception and decision-making: do farmers consider risks from climate change?," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 151(3), pages 507-524, December.
    21. Khonje, Makaiko & Mkandawire, Petros & Manda, Julius & Alene, Arega, 2015. "Analysis of adoption and impacts of improved cassava varieties," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 211842, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    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. Hernan Botero & Andrew P. Barnes, 2022. "The effect of ENSO on common bean production in Colombia: a time series approach," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 14(6), pages 1417-1430, December.

    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. Cindybell Gamboa & Goedele Van den Broeck & Miet Maertens, 2018. "Smallholders’ Preferences for Improved Quinoa Varieties in the Peruvian Andes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-22, October.
    2. Caroline Roussy & Aude Ridier & Karim Chaïb, 2014. "Adoption d’innovations par les agriculteurs : rôle des perceptions et des préférences," Post-Print hal-01123427, HAL.
    3. Anastassiadis, Friederike & Liebe, Ulf & Musshoff, Oliver, 2012. "Finanzielle Flexibilität In Landwirtschaftlichen Investitionsentscheidungen: Ein Discrete Choice Experiment," 52nd Annual Conference, Stuttgart, Germany, September 26-28, 2012 137142, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
    4. Timothy R. Silberg & Robert B. Richardson & Maria Claudia Lopez, 2020. "Maize farmer preferences for intercropping systems to reduce Striga in Malawi," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 12(2), pages 269-283, April.
    5. Teferi, Ermias Tesfaye & Kassie, Girma T. & Pe, Mario Enrico & Fadda, Carlo, 2020. "Are farmers willing to pay for climate related traits of wheat? Evidence from rural parts of Ethiopia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    6. Martin, Inès & Vranken, Liesbet & Ugás, Roberto, 2021. "Farmers’ Preferences to Cultivate Threatened Crop Varieties: Evidence from Peru," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315216, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    7. Mutanyagwa, Ange Pacifique, 2017. "Smallholder Farmers’ Preferences For Improved Maize Seeds Varieties In Tanzania," Research Theses 265536, Collaborative Masters Program in Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    8. Backson Mwangi & Ibrahim Macharia & Eric Bett, 2021. "Ex-post Impact Evaluation of Improved Sorghum Varieties on Poverty Reduction in Kenya: A Counterfactual Analysis," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 154(2), pages 447-467, April.
    9. Anastassiadis, F. & Liebe, U. & Mußhoff, O., 2013. "Finanzielle Flexibilität in landwirtschaftlichen Investitionsentscheidungen: Ein Discrete Experiment," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 48, March.
    10. Oyinbo, Oyakhilomen & Chamberlin, Jordan & Vanlauwe, Bernard & Vranken, Liesbet & Kamara, Alpha & Craufurd, Peter & Maertens, Miet, 2018. "Farmers' preferences for site-specific extension services: Evidence from a choice experiment in Nigeria," Working Papers 276175, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Centre for Agricultural and Food Economics.
    11. Doherty, Edel & Campbell, Danny, 2011. "Demand for improved food safety and quality: a cross-regional comparison," 85th Annual Conference, April 18-20, 2011, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 108791, Agricultural Economics Society.
    12. Qin, Pin & Carlsson, Fredrik & Xu, Jintao, 2009. "Forestland Reform in China: What do the Farmers Want? A Choice Experiment on Farmers’ Property Rights Preferences," Working Papers in Economics 370, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    13. Ping Qin & Fredrik Carlsson & Jintao Xu, 2011. "Forest Tenure Reform in China: A Choice Experiment on Farmers’ Property Rights Preferences," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 87(3), pages 473-487.
    14. Joachim Marti, 2012. "Assessing preferences for improved smoking cessation medications: a discrete choice experiment," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 13(5), pages 533-548, October.
    15. Dugstad, Anders & Grimsrud, Kristine & Kipperberg, Gorm & Lindhjem, Henrik & Navrud, Ståle, 2020. "Acceptance of wind power development and exposure – Not-in-anybody's-backyard," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    16. Ridier, Aude & Roussy, Caroline & Chaib, Karim, 2021. "Adoption of crop diversification by specialized grain farmers in south-western France: evidence from a choice-modelling experiment," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), vol. 102(1), April.
    17. Kallas, Z. & Gómez-Limón, J.A., 2007. "Valoración De La Multifuncionalidad Agraria: Una Aplicación A Través Del Método De Los Experimentos De Elección/Agricultural Multifunctionality Valuation: A Case Study Using The Choice Experiment," Estudios de Economia Aplicada, Estudios de Economia Aplicada, vol. 25, pages 107-144, Abril.
    18. Concu, Giovanni B., 2007. "Investigating distance effects on environmental values: a choice modelling approach," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 51(2), pages 1-20.
    19. Lehmann, Nico & Sloot, Daniel & Schüle, Christopher & Ardone, Armin & Fichtner, Wolf, 2023. "The motivational drivers behind consumer preferences for regional electricity – Results of a choice experiment in Southern Germany," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    20. Domínguez-Torreiro, Marcos & Soliño, Mario, 2011. "Provided and perceived status quo in choice experiments: Implications for valuing the outputs of multifunctional rural areas," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(12), pages 2523-2531.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Farm input markets; Land use; Global warming; Choice models; Classification methods;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q12 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Micro Analysis of Farm Firms, Farm Households, and Farm Input Markets
    • Q15 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Land Ownership and Tenure; Land Reform; Land Use; Irrigation; Agriculture and Environment
    • Q54 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Climate; Natural Disasters and their Management; Global Warming
    • C25 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Discrete Regression and Qualitative Choice Models; Discrete Regressors; Proportions; Probabilities
    • C38 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Multiple or Simultaneous Equation Models; Multiple Variables - - - Classification Methdos; Cluster Analysis; Principal Components; Factor Analysis

    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:eee:ecolec:v:190:y:2021:i:c:s0921800921002391. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon .

    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.