IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/zbw/espost/279478.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does zero tillage save or increase production costs? Evidence from smallholders in Kyrgyzstan

Author

Listed:
  • Tadjiev, Abdusame
  • Djanibekov, Nodir
  • Herzfeld, Thomas

Abstract

Promoting zero tillage has been recognized as an important strategy for smallholders from an agronomic perspective. However, the economic effects of adopting zero tillage are still a matter of debate. Employing an endogenous switching regression model on the plot-level panel data of 878 Kyrgyzstan’s smallholders, we investigate the determinants of decision to adopt zero tillage and its effect on smallholders’ production costs. We find that the probability of zero tillage adoption is associated with employment in agriculture, assets, agricultural shocks, fertilizer use, number of plots and average distances from dwelling to household fields and to main road. Furthermore, the results indicate that zero tillage adoption decreases land preparation costs by 23%, but increases hired labour and herbicide costs by 13% and 15%, respectively compared to conventional tillage method. Nevertheless, zero tillage can reduce total production costs by 15%. Our findings suggest that zero tillage can be promoted as an option for resource-scarce smallholders, especially to those in remote areas with poor access to inputs and machinery services. Promoting zero tillage adoption as a labour-saving or herbicide reducing practice can create false expectations among smallholders.

Suggested Citation

  • Tadjiev, Abdusame & Djanibekov, Nodir & Herzfeld, Thomas, 2023. "Does zero tillage save or increase production costs? Evidence from smallholders in Kyrgyzstan," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 21(1), pages 1-16.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:espost:279478
    DOI: 10.1080/14735903.2023.2270191
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/279478/1/Tadjiev_2023_zero_tillage.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/14735903.2023.2270191?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. Yigezu, Yigezu Atnafe & Mugera, Amin & El-Shater, Tamer & Aw-Hassan, Aden & Piggin, Colin & Haddad, Atef & Khalil, Yaseen & Loss, Stephen, 2018. "Enhancing adoption of agricultural technologies requiring high initial investment among smallholders," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 199-206.
    2. Maurizio Guadagni & Turi Fileccia, 2009. "The Kyrgyz Republic : Farm Mechanization and Agricultural Productivity," World Bank Publications - Reports 19476, The World Bank Group.
    3. Priscilla Wainaina & Songporne Tongruksawattana & Matin Qaim, 2016. "Tradeoffs and complementarities in the adoption of improved seeds, fertilizer, and natural resource management technologies in Kenya," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 47(3), pages 351-362, May.
    4. Hans G. P. Jansen & John Pender & Amy Damon & Willem Wielemaker & Rob Schipper, 2006. "Policies for sustainable development in the hillside areas of Honduras: a quantitative livelihoods approach," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 34(2), pages 141-153, March.
    5. Guillermo Montt & Trang Luu, 2020. "Does Conservation Agriculture Change Labour Requirements? Evidence of Sustainable Intensification in Sub‐Saharan Africa," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 71(2), pages 556-580, June.
    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. Gebremariam, Gebrelibanos & Tesfaye, Wondimagegn, 2018. "The heterogeneous effect of shocks on agricultural innovations adoption: Microeconometric evidence from rural Ethiopia," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 154-161.
    2. Ruzzante, Sacha & Labarta, Ricardo & Bilton, Amy, 2021. "Adoption of agricultural technology in the developing world: A meta-analysis of the empirical literature," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 146(C).
    3. Preusse, Verena & Wollni, Meike, 2021. "Adoption of sustainable agricultural practices in the context of urbanisation and environmental stress – Evidence from farmers in the rural-urban interface of Bangalore, India," 2021 Annual Meeting, August 1-3, Austin, Texas 312690, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    4. Smale, Melinda & Mason, Nicole M., 2012. "Demand for Maize Hybrids, Seed Subsidies, and Seed Decisionmakers in Zambia," Food Security Collaborative Working Papers 123555, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    5. Soltani, Arezoo & Angelsen, Arild & Eid, Tron & Naieni, Mohammad Saeid Noori & Shamekhi, Taghi, 2012. "Poverty, sustainability, and household livelihood strategies in Zagros, Iran," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 60-70.
    6. Ayala Wineman & Timothy Njagi & C. Leigh Anderson & Travis W. Reynolds & Didier Yélognissè Alia & Priscilla Wainaina & Eric Njue & Pierre Biscaye & Miltone W. Ayieko, 2020. "A Case of Mistaken Identity? Measuring Rates of Improved Seed Adoption in Tanzania Using DNA Fingerprinting," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 71(3), pages 719-741, September.
    7. Yen H. T. Nguyen & Tuyen Q. Tran & Dung T. Hoang & Thu M. T. Tran & Trung T. Nguyen, 2023. "Land quality, income, and poverty among rural households in the North Central Region, Vietnam," Poverty & Public Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(2), pages 150-172, June.
    8. Gil, J.M. & Diaz-Montenegro, J. & Varela, E., 2018. "A Bias-Adjusted Three-Step approach for analysing the livelihood strategies and the asset mix of cacao producers in Ecuador," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277215, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    9. Khushbu Mishra & Abdoul G. Sam & Gracious M. Diiro & Mario J. Miranda, 2020. "Gender and the dynamics of technology adoption: Empirical evidence from a household‐level panel data," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 51(6), pages 857-870, November.
    10. Yuchen Du & Junfeng Chen & Yi Xie, 2023. "The Impacts of the Asian Elephants Damage on Farmer’s Livelihood Strategies in Pu’er and Xishuangbanna in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-14, March.
    11. Sylvester Ochieng Ogutu & Andrea Fongar & Theda Gödecke & Lisa Jäckering & Henry Mwololo & Michael Njuguna & Meike Wollni & Matin Qaim, 2020. "How to make farming and agricultural extension more nutrition-sensitive: evidence from a randomised controlled trial in Kenya [Agricultural extension: good intentions and hard realities]," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 47(1), pages 95-118.
    12. Pai Wang & Mengna Qi & Yajia Liang & Xuebing Ling & Yan Song, 2019. "Examining the Relationship between Environmentally Friendly Land Use and Rural Revitalization Using a Coupling Analysis: A Case Study of Hainan Province, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(22), pages 1-19, November.
    13. Lecegui, Antonio & Olaizola, Ana María & López-i-Gelats, Feliu & Varela, Elsa, 2022. "Implementing the livelihood resilience framework: An indicator-based model for assessing mountain pastoral farming systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 199(C).
    14. Musa Hasen Ahmed & Kassahun Mamo Geleta & Aemro Tazeze & Hiwot Mekonnen Mesfin & Eden Andualem Tilahun, 2017. "Cropping systems diversification, improved seed, manure and inorganic fertilizer adoption by maize producers of eastern Ethiopia," Journal of Economic Structures, Springer;Pan-Pacific Association of Input-Output Studies (PAPAIOS), vol. 6(1), pages 1-16, December.
    15. Ku McMahan & Saad Usmani, 2022. "The Economic Benefits of Supporting Private Social Enterprise at the Nexus of Water and Agriculture: A Social Rate of Return Analysis of the Securing Water for Food Grand Challenge for Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-16, May.
    16. Savath, Vivien & Fletschner, Diana & Peterman, Amber & Santos, Florence, 2014. "Land, assets, and livelihoods: Gendered analysis of evidence from Odisha State in India:," IFPRI discussion papers 1323, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    17. Martey, Edward & Etwire, Prince Maxwell & Abdoulaye, Tahirou, 2020. "Welfare impacts of climate-smart agriculture in Ghana: Does row planting and drought-tolerant maize varieties matter?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    18. Tran, Quang Tuyen, 2014. "What determines household income of ethnic minorities in North-West Mountains, Vietnam: A microeconometric analysis of household surveys," MPRA Paper 60836, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 18 Dec 2014.
    19. Martey, Edward & Etwire, Prince M. & Adombilla, Ramson & Abebrese, Samuel O., 2023. "Information constraint and farmers’ willingness to pay for an irrigation scheduling tool," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 276(C).
    20. Gonzalo Villa‐Cox & Francesco Cavazza & Cristian Jordan & Mijail Arias‐Hidalgo & Paúl Herrera & Ramon Espinel & Davide Viaggi & Stijn Speelman, 2021. "Understanding constraints on private irrigation adoption decisions under uncertainty in data constrained settings: A novel empirical approach tested on Ecuadorian Cocoa cultivations," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 52(6), pages 985-999, 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:279478. 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.