IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Indian farmers' valuation of yield distributions: Will poor farmers value `pro-poor' seeds?


  • Lybbert, Travis J.


Potential poverty traps among the rural poor suggest a need to reduce poor farmers' vulnerability by stabilizing crop yields and limiting yield losses. Advances in biotechnology will help address this need directly with crops that tolerate climate fluctuation or resist biotic stresses. Evaluating ex ante how farmers will value these "poor" seeds is important for delivery design, but also challenging. This paper describes an experimental economic approach to understanding farmers' valuation of such seeds. Using data from a survey and experiment, I assess Indian farmers' valuation of changes in the mean, variance, and skewness of payoff distributions. These farmers value increases in expected value, but seem indifferent about higher moment changes in payoff distributions. Farmer traits such as wealth and risk exposure affect their valuation of these changes only mildly. While various limitations to the experimental approach must qualify practical implications of these findings, the experiment demonstrates the viability of conducting valuation experiments with open-ended questions in developing countries.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Lybbert, Travis J., 2006. "Indian farmers' valuation of yield distributions: Will poor farmers value `pro-poor' seeds?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 415-441, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:jfpoli:v:31:y:2006:i:5:p:415-441

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Hans P. Binswanger, 1980. "Attitudes Toward Risk: Experimental Measurement in Rural India," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 62(3), pages 395-407.
    2. Carter, Michael R. & May, Julian, 1999. "Poverty, livelihood and class in rural South Africa," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 1-20, January.
    3. Robert Tripp & Suresh Pal, 2000. "Information and agricultural input markets: pearl millet seed in Rajasthan," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(1), pages 133-144.
    4. Edward Balistreri & Gary McClelland & Gregory Poe & William Schulze, 2001. "Can Hypothetical Questions Reveal True Values? A Laboratory Comparison of Dichotomous Choice and Open-Ended Contingent Values with Auction Values," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 18(3), pages 275-292, March.
    5. 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.
    6. Travis J. Lybbert & Christopher B. Barrett & Solomon Desta & D. Layne Coppock, 2004. "Stochastic wealth dynamics and risk management among a poor population," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 114(498), pages 750-777, October.
    7. Tripp, Robert, 2001. "Can biotechnology reach the poor? The adequacy of information and seed delivery," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 249-264, June.
    8. Dercon, Stefan, 1998. "Wealth, risk and activity choice: cattle in Western Tanzania," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(1), pages 1-42, February.
    9. 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 255-298, January.
    10. Michael Lipton, 2001. "Reviving global poverty reduction: what role for genetically modified plants?," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 13(7), pages 823-846.
    11. Thirtle, Colin & Beyers, Lindie & Ismael, Yousouf & Piesse, Jenifer, 2003. "Can GM-Technologies Help the Poor? The Impact of Bt Cotton in Makhathini Flats, KwaZulu-Natal," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 717-732, April.
    12. Kahneman, Daniel & Tversky, Amos, 1979. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(2), pages 263-291, March.
    13. Pitt, Mark M & Sumodiningrat, Gunawan, 1991. "Risk, Schooling and the Choice of Seed Technology in Developing Countries: A Meta-Profit Function Approach," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 32(2), pages 457-473, May.
    14. Zimmerman, Frederick J. & Carter, Michael R., 2003. "Asset smoothing, consumption smoothing and the reproduction of inequality under risk and subsistence constraints," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(2), pages 233-260, August.
    15. Soniia David & Louise Sperling, 1999. "Improving technology delivery mechanisms: Lessons from bean seed systems research in eastern and central Africa," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 16(4), pages 381-388, December.
    16. Batz, F. -J. & Peters, K. J. & Janssen, W., 1999. "The influence of technology characteristics on the rate and speed of adoption," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 21(2), pages 121-130, October.
    17. Lybbert, Travis J. & Barrett, Christopher B. & Narjisse, Hamid, 2002. "Market-based conservation and local benefits: the case of argan oil in Morocco," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 125-144, April.
    18. Lisa A. Cameron, 1999. "The Importance of Learning in the Adoption of High-Yielding Variety Seeds," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 81(1), pages 83-94.
    19. Humphrey, Steven J. & Verschoor, Arjan, 2004. "The probability weighting function: experimental evidence from Uganda, India and Ethiopia," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 84(3), pages 419-425, September.
    20. Batz, Franz-J. & Peters, K.J. & Janssen, W., 1999. "The influence of technology characteristics on the rate and speed of adoption," Agricultural Economics of Agricultural Economists, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 21(2), October.
    21. Adesina, Akinwumi A. & Baidu-Forson, Jojo, 1995. "Farmers' perceptions and adoption of new agricultural technology: evidence from analysis in Burkina Faso and Guinea, West Africa," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 13(1), pages 1-9, October.
    22. Holloway, Garth & Nicholson, Charles & Delgado, Chris & Staal, Steve & Ehui, Simeon, 2000. "Agroindustrialization through institutional innovation: Transaction costs, cooperatives and milk-market development in the east-African highlands," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 23(3), pages 279-288, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


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

    Cited by:

    1. Galarza, Francisco, 2009. "Risk, Credit, and Insurance in Peru: Field Experimental Evidence," MPRA Paper 17833, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Galarza, Francisco B. & Carter, Michael R., 2010. "Risk Preferences and Demand for Insurance in Peru: A Field Experiment," 2010 Annual Meeting, July 25-27, 2010, Denver, Colorado 61871, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    3. Ward, Patrick S. & Ortega, David L. & Spielman, David J. & Singh, Vartika, 2013. "Farmer preferences for drought tolerance in hybrid versus inbred rice: Evidence from Bihar, India:," IFPRI discussion papers 1307, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    4. Ward, Patrick S. & Ortega, David L. & Spielman, David J. & Singh, Vartika, 2014. "Heterogeneous Demand for Drought-Tolerant Rice: Evidence from Bihar, India," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 125-139.
    5. Ward, Patrick S. & Ortega, David L. & Spielman, David J. & Singh, Vartika & Magnan, Nicholas, 2013. "Farmer Preferences for Abiotic Stress Tolerance in Hybrid versus Inbred Rice: Evidence from Bihar, India," 2013 Annual Meeting, August 4-6, 2013, Washington, D.C. 150786, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.

    More about this item


    Access and download statistics


    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:jfpoli:v:31:y:2006:i:5:p:415-441. 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: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.