How does gender affect the adoption of agricultural innovations?: The case of improved maize technology in Ghana
Why do men and women adopt agricultural technologies at different rates? Evidence from Ghana suggests that gender-linked differences in the adoption of modern maize varieties and chemical fertilizer result from gender-linked differences in access to complementary inputs. This finding has important policy implications, because it suggests that ensuring more widespread and equitable adoption of improved technologies may not require changes in the research system, but rather introduction of measures that ensure better access for women to complementary inputs, especially land, labor, and extension services. © 2001 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- 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.
- Doss, Cheryl R., 2002. "Men's Crops? Women's Crops? The Gender Patterns of Cropping in Ghana," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 30(11), pages 1987-2000, November.
- Doss, Cheryl R., 1999. "Twenty-Five Years Of Research On Women Farmers In Africa: Lessons And Implications For Agricultural Research Institutions; With An Annotated Bibliography," Economics Program Papers 23720, CIMMYT: International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center.
- Rogers, Beatrice Lorge, 1995. "Alternative definitions of female headship in the Dominican Republic," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 23(12), pages 2033-2039, December.
- Kumar, Shubh K., 1994. "Adoption of hybrid maize in Zambia: effects on gender roles, food consumption, and nutrition," Research reports 100, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
- Udry, Christopher, 1996. "Gender, Agricultural Production, and the Theory of the Household," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 104(5), pages 1010-46, October.
- Feder, Gershon & Just, Richard E & Zilberman, David, 1985. "Adoption of Agricultural Innovations in Developing Countries: A Survey," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 33(2), pages 255-98, January.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:agecon:v:25:y:2001:i:1:p:27-39. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Shamier, Wendy)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.