IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/srbeha/v29y2012i6p575-589.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Designing Sustainable Food Security Policies in Sub‐Saharan African Countries: How Social Dynamics Over‐Ride Utility Evaluations for Good and Bad

Author

Listed:
  • Birgit Kopainsky
  • Katharine Tröger
  • Sebastian Derwisch
  • Silvia Ulli‐Beer

Abstract

Sub‐Saharan African economies depend heavily on agriculture. Seed from improved varieties and other inputs are imperative to the transformation of the agricultural sector from subsistence farming to small‐scale commercial agriculture and thus to increasing food security on the continent. Farmers make the decision to adopt seed from improved varieties based on a number of seed attributes. These range from tangible attributes such as input costs and yield to intangible attributes such as trust in seed from improved varieties. In the course of adoption decisions, social dynamics involving trust can over‐ride objective evaluations of tangible attributes. This makes it difficult to design sustainable adoption policies in an intuitive way. For this purpose, we develop a system dynamics model and combine it with conjoint analysis. Conjoint analysis allows us to elicit smallholder farmers’ choice preferences in detail and to add precision to the structure of the model. The simulation framework helps to improve our understanding concerning the dynamic implications of accumulation processes relating to trust and skill. We test this approach with empirical data for maize in Malawi. Model simulations demonstrate that effective adoption stimulation policies should focus on measures that build trust in improved maize varieties instead of increasing their potential yield even further and, in this way, contribute to food security. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Suggested Citation

  • Birgit Kopainsky & Katharine Tröger & Sebastian Derwisch & Silvia Ulli‐Beer, 2012. "Designing Sustainable Food Security Policies in Sub‐Saharan African Countries: How Social Dynamics Over‐Ride Utility Evaluations for Good and Bad," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(6), pages 575-589, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:srbeha:v:29:y:2012:i:6:p:575-589
    DOI: 10.1002/sres.2140
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/sres.2140
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/sres.2140?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. Harrigan, Jane, 2008. "Food insecurity, poverty and the Malawian Starter Pack: Fresh start or false start?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 237-249, June.
    2. Foster, Andrew D & Rosenzweig, Mark R, 1995. "Learning by Doing and Learning from Others: Human Capital and Technical Change in Agriculture," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 103(6), pages 1176-1209, December.
    3. Marra, Michele & Pannell, David J. & Abadi Ghadim, Amir, 2003. "The economics of risk, uncertainty and learning in the adoption of new agricultural technologies: where are we on the learning curve?," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 75(2-3), pages 215-234.
    4. Sunding, David & Zilberman, David, 2001. "The agricultural innovation process: Research and technology adoption in a changing agricultural sector," Handbook of Agricultural Economics, in: B. L. Gardner & G. C. Rausser (ed.), Handbook of Agricultural Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 4, pages 207-261, Elsevier.
    5. Kelvin J. Lancaster, 1966. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74(2), pages 132-132.
    6. Munshi, Kaivan, 2004. "Social learning in a heterogeneous population: technology diffusion in the Indian Green Revolution," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 185-213, February.
    7. Paul E. Green & Abba M. Krieger & Yoram Wind, 2001. "Thirty Years of Conjoint Analysis: Reflections and Prospects," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 31(3_supplem), pages 56-73, June.
    8. Abadi Ghadim, Amir K. & Pannell, David J., 1999. "A conceptual framework of adoption of an agricultural innovation," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 21(2), pages 145-154, October.
    9. Jeroen Struben & John D. Sterman, 2008. "Transition Challenges for Alternative Fuel Vehicle and Transportation Systems," Post-Print hal-02312277, HAL.
    10. Morris, Michael L. & Tripp, Robert & Dankyi, A.A., 1999. "Adoption and Impacts of Improved Maize Production Technology: A Case Study of the Ghana Grains Development Project," Economics Program Papers 48767, CIMMYT: International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center.
    11. Maredia, Mywish K. & Howard, Julie A. & Boughton, Duncan & Naseem, Anwar & Wanzala, Maria N. & Kajisa, Kei, 1999. "Increasing Seed System Efficiency in Africa: Concepts, Strategies and Issues," Food Security International Development Working Papers 54578, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    12. Brice Dattée & Henry Weil, 2007. "Dynamics of social factors in technological substitutions," Post-Print hal-02312753, HAL.
    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. Merla Kubli, 2020. "Navigating through the unknown: How conjoint analysis reduces uncertainty in energy consumer modelling," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(6), pages 880-885, November.

    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. Jean‐Paul Chavas & Céline Nauges, 2020. "Uncertainty, Learning, and Technology Adoption in Agriculture," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 42(1), pages 42-53, March.
    2. B Kelsey Jack, "undated". "Market Inefficiencies and the Adoption of Agricultural Technologies in Developing Countries," CID Working Papers 50, Center for International Development at Harvard University.
    3. Caroline Roussy & Aude Ridier & Karim Chaïb, 2014. "Adoption d’innovations par les agriculteurs : rôle des perceptions et des préférences," Post-Print hal-01123427, HAL.
    4. Fang, Di & Richards, Timothy, 2016. "New Maize Variety Adoption in Mozambique: A Spatial Approach," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 235388, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    5. Michelson, Hope & Fairbairn, Anna & Ellison, Brenna & Maertens, Annemie & Manyong, Victor, 2021. "Misperceived quality: Fertilizer in Tanzania," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    6. Mohamed Ghali & Maha Ben Jaballah & Nejla Ben Arfa & Annie Sigwalt, 2022. "Analysis of factors that influence adoption of agroecological practices in viticulture," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 103(3), pages 179-209, September.
    7. Tavneet Suri, 2006. "Selection and Comparative Advantage in Technology Adoption," Working Papers 944, Economic Growth Center, Yale University.
    8. Yoo, Do-il, 2012. "Individual and Social Learning in Bio-technology Adoption: The Case of GM Corn in the U.S," 2012 Annual Meeting, August 12-14, 2012, Seattle, Washington 124975, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    9. Lim, Krisha & Wichmann, Bruno & Luckert, Martin, 2021. "Adaptation, spatial effects, and targeting: Evidence from Africa and Asia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    10. Alfons Weersink & Murray Fulton, 2020. "Limits to Profit Maximization as a Guide to Behavior Change," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 42(1), pages 67-79, March.
    11. Chatzimichael, Konstantinos & Genius, Margarita & Tzouvelekas, Vangelis, 2014. "Informational cascades and technology adoption: Evidence from Greek and German organic growers," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(P1), pages 186-195.
    12. BLAZY Jean-Marc & CARPENTIER Alain & THOMAS Alban, 2008. "An ex ante adoption model of low input innovations applied to banana growers in the French West Indies," LERNA Working Papers 08.32.276, LERNA, University of Toulouse.
    13. Satadru Mukherjee, 2020. "Access to Formal Banks and New Technology Adoption: Evidence from India," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 102(5), pages 1532-1556, October.
    14. Ross, Nicholas & Santos, Paulo & Capon, Timothy, 2012. "Risk, ambiguity and the adoption of new technologies: experimental evidence from a developing economy," 2012 Conference, August 18-24, 2012, Foz do Iguacu, Brazil 126492, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    15. Mohamed Ghali & Maha Ben Jaballah & Nejla Ben Arfa & Annie Sigwalt, 2022. "Analysis of factors that influence adoption of agroecological practices in viticulture," Post-Print hal-04071759, HAL.
    16. Arslan, Cansın & Wollni, Meike & Oduol, Judith & Hughes, Karl, 2022. "Who communicates the information matters for technology adoption," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    17. Wang, Honglin & Yu, Fan & Reardon, Thomas & Huang, Jikun & Rozelle, Scott, 2013. "Social learning and parameter uncertainty in irreversible investments: Evidence from greenhouse adoption in northern China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 104-120.
    18. Le, Thi Quynh Anh & Shimamura, Yasuharu & Yamada, Hiroyuki, 2020. "Information acquisition and the adoption of a new rice variety towards the development of sustainable agriculture in rural villages in Central Vietnam," World Development Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 20(C).
    19. Tavneet Suri, 2009. "Selection and Comparative Advantage in Technology Adoption," NBER Working Papers 15346, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Lambrecht, Isabel & Vanlauwe, Bernard & Merckx, Roel & Maertens, Miet, 2014. "Understanding the Process of Agricultural Technology Adoption: Mineral Fertilizer in Eastern DR Congo," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 132-146.

    More about this item

    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:bla:srbeha:v:29:y:2012:i:6:p:575-589. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/1092-7026 .

    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.