IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v117y2022ics0264837722001132.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Mixed public-private and private extension systems: A comparative analysis using farm-level data from Ireland

Author

Listed:
  • Balaine, Lorraine
  • Buckley, Cathal
  • Dillon, Emma J.

Abstract

Empirical evidence remains scarce in the literature as to whether public and private sectors can effectively coordinate and provide extension services to the whole farming population with respect to sustainable agricultural production. This article compares farmer cohorts participating in mixed public-private and/or private extension services, and non-participants in the context of Irish dairy farming. Differences in farm and farmers’ characteristics are analysed with non-linear regression models, while farm economic and environmental sustainability performance is compared across groups using linear regression models. The findings show that farm size, stocking rate, dairy specialisation, and levels of farm management vary across cohorts, thereby suggesting that mixed public-private and private extension systems can target different pools of participants. Extension participation is associated with higher economic performance, but the analysis provides no evidence of improved environmental sustainability. When comparing mixed public-private and private extension systems in detail, no differences are found in performance across both sustainability dimensions. Policy implications are drawn for the design and implementation of publicly funded extension programmes to achieve greater farm sustainability. Notably, programme worthwhileness, payment schemes, and participants’ selection criteria are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Balaine, Lorraine & Buckley, Cathal & Dillon, Emma J., 2022. "Mixed public-private and private extension systems: A comparative analysis using farm-level data from Ireland," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:117:y:2022:i:c:s0264837722001132
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2022.106086
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837722001132
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2022.106086?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. David R. Lee, 2005. "Agricultural Sustainability and Technology Adoption: Issues and Policies for Developing Countries," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 87(5), pages 1325-1334.
    2. Hausman, Jerry & McFadden, Daniel, 1984. "Specification Tests for the Multinomial Logit Model," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(5), pages 1219-1240, September.
    3. Ragasa, Catherine & Mazunda, John, 2018. "The impact of agricultural extension services in the context of a heavily subsidized input system: The case of Malawi," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 25-47.
    4. Doris Läpple & Bradford L Barham & Jean-Paul Chavas, 2020. "The role of extension in dynamic economic adjustments: the case of Irish dairy farms [What influences farm size growth? An illustration in Southwestern France]," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 47(1), pages 71-94.
    5. Wuepper, David & Roleff, Nikolaus & Finger, Robert, 2021. "Does it matter who advises farmers? Pest management choices with public and private extension," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    6. Oscar Montes de Oca Munguia & Rick Llewellyn, 2020. "The Adopters versus the Technology: Which Matters More when Predicting or Explaining Adoption?," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 42(1), pages 80-91, March.
    7. Kazushi Takahashi & Rie Muraoka & Keijiro Otsuka, 2020. "Technology adoption, impact, and extension in developing countries’ agriculture: A review of the recent literature," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 51(1), pages 31-45, January.
    8. David Hensher & William Greene, 2003. "The Mixed Logit model: The state of practice," Transportation, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 133-176, May.
    9. Greene, William H. & Hensher, David A., 2003. "A latent class model for discrete choice analysis: contrasts with mixed logit," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 681-698, September.
    10. Breusch, T S & Pagan, A R, 1979. "A Simple Test for Heteroscedasticity and Random Coefficient Variation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(5), pages 1287-1294, September.
    11. Ariel BenYishay & A Mushfiq Mobarak, 2019. "Social Learning and Incentives for Experimentation and Communication," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 86(3), pages 976-1009.
    12. Guido W. Imbens & Jeffrey M. Wooldridge, 2009. "Recent Developments in the Econometrics of Program Evaluation," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(1), pages 5-86, March.
    13. Vijverberg, Wim P., 2011. "Testing for IIA with the Hausman-McFadden Test," IZA Discussion Papers 5826, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    14. Kelvin Mashisia Shikuku & Janneke Pieters & Erwin Bulte & Peter Läderach, 2019. "Incentives and the Diffusion of Agricultural Knowledge: Experimental Evidence from Northern Uganda," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 101(4), pages 1164-1180.
    15. Paula Cullen & Pierre Dupraz & James Moran & Pat Murphy & Ronan O'Flaherty & Cathal O'Donoghue & Robert O'Shea & Mary Ryan, 2018. "Agri‐Environment Scheme Design: Past Lessons and Future Suggestions," EuroChoices, The Agricultural Economics Society, vol. 17(3), pages 26-30, December.
    16. Doris Läpple & Thia Hennessy, 2015. "Assessing the Impact of Financial Incentives in Extension Programmes: Evidence From Ireland," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 66(3), pages 781-795, September.
    17. Jock R. Anderson, 2004. "Agricultural Extension: Good Intentions and Hard Realities," The World Bank Research Observer, World Bank, vol. 19(1), pages 41-60.
    18. S. Niggol Seo, 2010. "A Microeconometric Analysis of Adapting Portfolios to Climate Change: Adoption of Agricultural Systems in Latin America," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 32(3), pages 489-514.
    19. Laurens Klerkx & Karin Grip & Cees Leeuwis, 2006. "Hands off but Strings Attached: The Contradictions of Policy-induced Demand-driven Agricultural Extension," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 23(2), pages 189-204, June.
    20. Anthony Cawley & Cathal O’Donoghue & Kevin Heanue & Rachel Hilliard & Maura Sheehan, 2018. "The Impact of Extension Services on Farm‐level Income: An Instrumental Variable Approach to Combat Endogeneity Concerns," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(4), pages 585-612, December.
    21. Barnes, A.P. & Soto, I. & Eory, V. & Beck, B. & Balafoutis, A. & Sánchez, B. & Vangeyte, J. & Fountas, S. & van der Wal, T. & Gómez-Barbero, M., 2019. "Exploring the adoption of precision agricultural technologies: A cross regional study of EU farmers," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 163-174.
    22. Jesus Barreiro-Hurle & Maria Espinosa-Goded & Pierre Dupraz, 2010. "Does intensity of change matter? Factors affecting adoption of agri-environmental schemes in Spain," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 53(7), pages 891-905.
    23. Yuko Nakano & Yuki Tanaka & Keijiro Otsuka, 2018. "Impact of training on the intensification of rice farming: evidence from rainfed areas in Tanzania," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 49(2), pages 193-202, March.
    24. Martin Nordin & Sören Höjgård, 2017. "An evaluation of extension services in Sweden," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 48(1), pages 51-60, January.
    25. George W. Norton & Jeffrey Alwang, 2020. "Changes in Agricultural Extension and Implications for Farmer Adoption of New Practices," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 42(1), pages 8-20, March.
    26. David J. Pannell & Roger Claassen, 2020. "The Roles of Adoption and Behavior Change in Agricultural Policy," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 42(1), pages 31-41, March.
    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. Kate Vaiknoras & Catherine Larochelle, 2023. "Training and seed production spillovers and technology adoption: The case of seed producer groups in Nepal," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 54(6), pages 921-942, November.
    2. Olivia Bertelli & Fatou Fall, 2023. "Reaching out to socially distant trainees. Experimental evidence from variations on the standard farmer trainer system," Working Papers DT/2023/03, DIAL (Développement, Institutions et Mondialisation).
    3. Kazushi Takahashi & Rie Muraoka & Keijiro Otsuka, 2020. "Technology adoption, impact, and extension in developing countries’ agriculture: A review of the recent literature," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 51(1), pages 31-45, January.
    4. Qian Liu & Yongmu Jiang & Carl‐Johan Lagerkvist & Wei Huang, 2023. "Extension services and the technical efficiency of crop‐specific farms in China," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 45(1), pages 436-459, March.
    5. Yitayew, Asresu & Abdulai, Awudu & Yigezu, Yigezu A. & Deneke, Tilaye T. & Kassie, Girma T., 2021. "Impact of agricultural extension services on the adoption of improved wheat variety in Ethiopia: A cluster randomized controlled trial," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 146(C).
    6. Doris Läpple, 2023. "Information about Climate Change Mitigation: What Do Farmers Think?," EuroChoices, The Agricultural Economics Society, vol. 22(1), pages 74-80, April.
    7. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Hensher, David A., 2021. "The landscape of econometric discrete choice modelling research," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    8. Rick S. Llewellyn & Brendan Brown, 2020. "Predicting Adoption of Innovations by Farmers: What is Different in Smallholder Agriculture?," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 42(1), pages 100-112, March.
    9. Kajisa, Kei & Vu, Trang Thu, 2023. "The importance of farm management training for the African rice Green Revolution: Experimental evidence from rainfed lowland areas in Mozambique," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    10. Anthony Cawley & Kevin Heanue & Rachel Hilliard & Cathal O’Donoghue & Maura Sheehan, 2023. "How Knowledge Transfer Impact Happens at the Farm Level: Insights from Advisers and Farmers in the Irish Agricultural Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-24, February.
    11. Bertelli, Olivia & Fall, Fatou, 2022. "Motivating Farmer Trainers. Experimental evidence from rural Uganda," 96th Annual Conference, April 4-6, 2022, K U Leuven, Belgium 321175, Agricultural Economics Society - AES.
    12. Denise Hörner & Adrien Bouguen & Markus Frölich & Meike Wollni, 2022. "Knowledge and Adoption of Complex Agricultural Technologies: Evidence from an Extension Experiment," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 36(1), pages 68-90.
    13. Kosenius, Anna-Kaisa, 2010. "Heterogeneous preferences for water quality attributes: The Case of eutrophication in the Gulf of Finland, the Baltic Sea," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(3), pages 528-538, January.
    14. Mohammad Mahbubur Rahman & Jeffry D. Connor, 2022. "Impact of Agricultural Extension Services on Fertilizer Use and Farmers’ Welfare: Evidence from Bangladesh," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-16, July.
    15. Dario Schulz & Jan Börner, 2023. "Innovation context and technology traits explain heterogeneity across studies of agricultural technology adoption: A meta‐analysis," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 74(2), pages 570-590, June.
    16. Haile, Kaleab K. & Tirivayi, Nyasha & Tesfaye, Wondimagegn, 2019. "Farmers’ willingness to accept payments for ecosystem services on agricultural land: The case of climate-smart agroforestry in Ethiopia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    17. David Pannell & David Zilberman, 2020. "Understanding Adoption of Innovations and Behavior Change to Improve Agricultural Policy," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 42(1), pages 3-7, March.
    18. Annemie Maertens & Hope Michelson & Vesall Nourani, 2021. "How Do Farmers Learn from Extension Services? Evidence from Malawi," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 103(2), pages 569-595, March.
    19. Anthony Cawley & Cathal O’Donoghue & Kevin Heanue & Rachel Hilliard & Maura Sheehan, 2018. "The Impact of Extension Services on Farm‐level Income: An Instrumental Variable Approach to Combat Endogeneity Concerns," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(4), pages 585-612, December.
    20. Justice A. Tambo & Mathews Matimelo, 2022. "An act of defiance? Measuring farmer deviation from personalised extension recommendations in Zambia," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 73(2), pages 396-413, June.

    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:lauspo:v:117:y:2022:i:c:s0264837722001132. 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: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-policy .

    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.