IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fpr/esspdp/7.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Agricultural extension in Ethiopia through a gender and governance lens

Author

Listed:
  • Mogues, Tewodaj
  • Cohen, Marc J.
  • Birner, Regina
  • Lemma, Mamusha
  • Randriamamonjy, Josee
  • Tadesse, Fanaye
  • Paulos, Zelekawork

Abstract

Drawing on a household survey collected in eight woredas in seven Ethiopian regions in 2009, as well as on qualitative fieldwork in four of the eight woredas, this paper provides analysis of agricultural extension delivery in Ethiopia. While overall extension services are relatively accessible in Ethiopia, there are differences in access between men and women, and particularly stark differences by region. Individual visits by public sector extension agents to household farms are by far the most common mode of extension delivery; alternative modes of extension (either in delivery method or type of service provider) play a rather limited role. Using the method widely applied in the "Citizen Report Card" approach, questions to farmers regarding satisfaction with services yielded near 100 percent reporting of satisfaction; however, the study also showed relatively low uptake of extension advice. This suggests the need to revisit or refine the Citizen Report Card method of eliciting satisfaction with services in this type of empirical context. Women's groups (e.g. the women's associations at the kebele level in rural areas) may be a promising approach to reach women with extension services; in some of the study sites, they were able to successfully link extension agents with women farmers and circumvent the socially sensitive issue of (male) extension agents providing advice to women one-on-one. However, the use of women's associations also for other matters, e.g. political mobilization of women, may weaken their promise in expanding access to extension services for women farmers. Finally, making agricultural extension demand driven remains a challenge in Ethiopia. While there is strong political will to expand agricultural extension in Ethiopia, the strong standardisation of extension packages arising from a pronounced top-down nature of public service delivery makes it difficult to tailor agricultural extension to farmers' needs. The incentives of extension agents are set in a way that they try to maximize farmers' adoption of standardized packages. The packages have become less rigid in recent years, with a menu of options now available to farmers. However, even the more diversified menu cannot substitute for the microlevel adaptation, the process that would make new inputs and practices more credible to farmers, and which only extension workers and their farmers can feasibly manage.

Suggested Citation

  • Mogues, Tewodaj & Cohen, Marc J. & Birner, Regina & Lemma, Mamusha & Randriamamonjy, Josee & Tadesse, Fanaye & Paulos, Zelekawork, 2009. "Agricultural extension in Ethiopia through a gender and governance lens," ESSP discussion papers 7, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
  • Handle: RePEc:fpr:esspdp:7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.ifpri.org/cdmref/p15738coll2/id/130938/filename/131149.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mekonnen, Daniel Ayalew & Gerber, Nicolas & Matz, Julia Anna, 2018. "Gendered Social Networks, Agricultural Innovations, and Farm Productivity in Ethiopia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 321-335.
    2. Cheryl O’Brien & Laura Leavens & Cheikh Ndiaye & Djibril Traoré, 2022. "Women’s Empowerment, Income, and Nutrition in a Food Processing Value Chain Development Project in Touba, Senegal," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(15), pages 1-29, August.
    3. Abate, Gashaw T. & Dereje, Mekdim & Hirvonen, Kalle & Minten, Bart, 2020. "Geography of public service delivery in rural Ethiopia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    4. Woldu, Thomas & Tadesse, Fanaye & Waller, Marie-Katherine, 2013. "Women’s participation in agricultural cooperatives in Ethiopia:," ESSP working papers 57, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    5. Paswel P. Marenya & Menale B. Kassie & Moti D. Jaleta & Dil B. Rahut, 2017. "Maize Market Participation among Female- and Male-Headed Households in Ethiopia," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 53(4), pages 481-494, April.
    6. Järnberg, Linn & Enfors Kautsky, Elin & Dagerskog, Linus & Olsson, Per, 2018. "Green niche actors navigating an opaque opportunity context: Prospects for a sustainable transformation of Ethiopian agriculture," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 409-421.
    7. Muluken Gezahegn Wordofa & Maria Sassi, 2017. "Impact of Farmers’ Training Centres on Household Income: Evidence from Propensity Score Matching in Eastern Ethiopia," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 7(1), pages 1-12, December.
    8. Mara van den Bold & Andrew Dillon & Deanna Olney & Marcellin Ouedraogo & Abdoulaye Pedehombga & Agnes Quisumbing, 2015. "Can Integrated Agriculture-Nutrition Programmes Change Gender Norms on Land and Asset Ownership? Evidence from Burkina Faso," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 51(9), pages 1155-1174, September.
    9. Marenya, Paswel & Kassie, Menale & Jaleta, Moti & Rahut, Dil Bahadur, 2015. "Does gender of the household head explain smallholder farmers' maize market positions? Evidence from Ethiopia," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 212229, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    10. Jones, Maria & Kondylis, Florence, 2018. "Does feedback matter? Evidence from agricultural services," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 28-41.

    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:fpr:esspdp:7. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ifprius.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.