IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i20p8473-d427981.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Evolving Agricultural Extension Model for Lasting Impact: How Willing Are Tanzanian Farmers to Pay for Extension Services?

Author

Listed:
  • Rodrigo Abed

    (ACDI/VOCA, 50 F Street NW, Suite 1000, Washington, DC 20001, USA)

  • Haroon Sseguya

    (International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA), Regional Hub for Eastern Africa, P.O. Box 34441 Dar es Salaam, Tanzania)

  • James Flock

    (ACDI/VOCA, 50 F Street NW, Suite 1000, Washington, DC 20001, USA)

  • Silvanus Mruma

    (ACDI/VOCA, Feed the Future Tanzania NAFAKA II Activity, P.O. Box 185 Iringa, Tanzania)

  • Hamisi Mwango

    (ACDI/VOCA, Feed the Future Tanzania NAFAKA II Activity, P.O. Box 185 Iringa, Tanzania)

Abstract

Community-based extension services (CES) are vital for improving farmers’ livelihoods, but most of them face a challenge of sustainability after phasing out of the externally funded initiatives that they are part of. This study estimated farmer’s willingness to pay (WTP) for four types of agricultural extension services (AES) in the cereals’ value chains provided as a part of two United States Agency for International Development (USAID)-funded Feed the Future initiatives in Tanzania. Data were collected from 595 smallholder cereal farmers using a primary survey in four districts of the Southern Highlands. We implemented a double-bounded dichotomous choice contingent valuation method. Average WTP figures ranged from 20,000 to 24,000 TZS (8–10 USD) depending on the type of AES. Several socioeconomic and agriculture-related variables influenced smallholders’ WTP for the extension services. This research explored the feasibility of a farmer-led model as a pathway to delink extension services from public and donor funding to achieve sustainable rural development. Farmers place a monetary value on extension services indicating that policymakers and practitioners should make further efforts to enhance a community’s ability to achieve self-reliance through investments in CES.

Suggested Citation

  • Rodrigo Abed & Haroon Sseguya & James Flock & Silvanus Mruma & Hamisi Mwango, 2020. "An Evolving Agricultural Extension Model for Lasting Impact: How Willing Are Tanzanian Farmers to Pay for Extension Services?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-13, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:20:p:8473-:d:427981
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/20/8473/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/20/8473/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Davis, K. & Nkonya, E. & Kato, E. & Mekonnen, D.A. & Odendo, M. & Miiro, R. & Nkuba, J., 2012. "Impact of Farmer Field Schools on Agricultural Productivity and Poverty in East Africa," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 402-413.
    2. Lopez-Feldman, Alejandro, 2012. "Introduction to contingent valuation using Stata," MPRA Paper 41018, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Catherine Larochelle & Jeffrey Alwang & Elli Travis & Victor Hugo Barrera & Juan Manuel Dominguez Andrade, 2019. "Did You Really Get the Message? Using Text Reminders to Stimulate Adoption of Agricultural Technologies," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 55(4), pages 548-564, April.
    4. Klaus Deininger, 2003. "Land Policies for Growth and Poverty Reduction," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 15125, April.
    5. Bishop, Richard C. & Heberlein, Thomas A., 1979. "Measuring Values Of Extramarket Goods: Are Indirect Measures Biased?," 1979 Annual Meeting, July 29-August 1, Pullman, Washington 277818, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    6. E. Strazzera & R. Scarpa & P. Calia & G. Garrod & K. Willis, 2000. "Modelling zero bids in contingent valuation surveys," Working Paper CRENoS 200006, Centre for North South Economic Research, University of Cagliari and Sassari, Sardinia.
    7. Michael Hanemann & John Loomis & Barbara Kanninen, 1991. "Statistical Efficiency of Double-Bounded Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 73(4), pages 1255-1263.
    8. Apurba Shee & Carlo Azzarri & Beliyou Haile, 2019. "Farmers’ Willingness to Pay for Improved Agricultural Technologies: Evidence from a Field Experiment in Tanzania," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-13, December.
    9. Alain de JANVRY & Elisabeth SADOULET, 2017. "Achieving the Sustainable Development Goal on Poverty Eradication," Working Papers P190, FERDI.
    10. Paul R. Portney, 1994. "The Contingent Valuation Debate: Why Economists Should Care," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 3-17, Fall.
    11. Carson, R.T. & Mitchell, R.C. & Hanemann, W.M. & Kopp, R.J. & Presser, S. & Ruud, P.A., 1992. "A Contingent Valuation Study of Lost Passive Use Values Resulting From the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill," MPRA Paper 6984, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Ian J. Bateman & Richard T. Carson & Brett Day & Michael Hanemann & Nick Hanley & Tannis Hett & Michael Jones-Lee & Graham Loomes, 2002. "Economic Valuation with Stated Preference Techniques," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2639, December.
    13. Evelyne Kiptot & Steven Franzel, 2014. "Voluntarism as an investment in human, social and financial capital: evidence from a farmer-to-farmer extension program in Kenya," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 31(2), pages 231-243, June.
    14. Richard C. Bishop & Thomas A. Heberlein, 1979. "Measuring Values of Extramarket Goods: Are Indirect Measures Biased?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 61(5), pages 926-930.
    15. Brendan Fisher & Robin Naidoo, 2016. "The Geography of Gender Inequality," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(3), pages 1-10, March.
    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. Ermias Tesfaye Teferi & Tigist Damtew Worku & Solomon Bizuayehu Wassie & Bernd Muller & Abdul-Rahim Abdulai & Céline Termote, 2024. "Heterogeneities in Farmers’ Preference for Advisory Services: A Choice Experiment of Vegetable Growers in North-Western Ethiopia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(24), pages 1-15, December.
    2. Jeremiah Mkomagi & Devotha Mosha & Athman Ahmad, 2022. "Beneficiaries’ attitudes towards resources withdrawal for selected donor-funded agriculture-related projects in Tanzania," International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science (2147-4478), Center for the Strategic Studies in Business and Finance, vol. 11(3), pages 206-216, April.
    3. Togba V. Sumo & Cecilia Ritho & Patrick Irungu, 2023. "Determinants of Smallholder Rice Farmers’ Willingness-to-Pay for Private Extension Services in Liberia: The Case of Gibi District," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-13, September.

    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. Dahal, Ram P. & Grala, Robert K. & Gordon, Jason S. & Petrolia, Daniel R. & Munn, Ian A., 2018. "Estimating the willingness to pay to preserve waterfront open spaces using contingent valuation," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 614-626.
    2. Richard Carson & Robert Mitchell & Michael Hanemann & Raymond Kopp & Stanley Presser & Paul Ruud, 2003. "Contingent Valuation and Lost Passive Use: Damages from the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 25(3), pages 257-286, July.
    3. W. Michael Hanemann, 1994. "Valuing the Environment through Contingent Valuation," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 19-43, Fall.
    4. Richard Carson & Nicholas Flores & Norman Meade, 2001. "Contingent Valuation: Controversies and Evidence," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 19(2), pages 173-210, June.
    5. Deutschmann, Joshua W. & Postepska, Agnieszka & Sarr, Leopold, 2021. "Measuring willingness to pay for reliable electricity: Evidence from Senegal," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    6. Fernando Alonso, 2002. "The benefits of building barrier-free: a contingent valuation of accessibility as an attribute of housing," European Journal of Housing Policy, Taylor and Francis Journals, vol. 2(1), pages 25-44.
    7. Gebretsadik, Kidanemariam Abreha & Romstad, Eirik, 2020. "Climate and farmers’ willingness to pay for improved irrigation water supply," World Development Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 20(C).
    8. Nikola Jovanoski, 2015. "Estimating the Value of Preserving the Doubs," IRENE Working Papers 15-02, IRENE Institute of Economic Research.
    9. Langford, Ian H. & Bateman, Ian J., 1996. "Elicitation and truncation effects in contingent valuation studies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 265-267, December.
    10. Hanemann, W. Michael & Kanninen, Barbara, 1996. "The Statistical Analysis Of Discrete-Response Cv Data," CUDARE Working Papers 25022, University of California, Berkeley, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    11. Jesus Barreiro & Mercedes Sanchez & Montserrat Viladrich-Grau, 2005. "How much are people willing to pay for silence? A contingent valuation study," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(11), pages 1233-1246.
    12. Massimo Florio & Francesco Giffoni, 2020. "A contingent valuation experiment about future particle accelerators at CERN," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(3), pages 1-24, March.
    13. Richard Carson & Theodore Groves, 2007. "Incentive and informational properties of preference questions," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 37(1), pages 181-210, May.
    14. John K. Horowitz & Kenneth E. McConnell & James J. Murphy, 2013. "Behavioral foundations of environmental economics and valuation," Chapters, in: John A. List & Michael K. Price (ed.), Handbook on Experimental Economics and the Environment, chapter 4, pages 115-156, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    15. DeShazo, J. R., 2002. "Designing Transactions without Framing Effects in Iterative Question Formats," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 360-385, May.
    16. Soliño, Mario & Vázquez, María X. & Prada, Albino, 2009. "Social demand for electricity from forest biomass in Spain: Does payment periodicity affect the willingness to pay?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 531-540, February.
    17. Rihar, Miha & Hrovatin, Nevenka & Zoric, Jelena, 2015. "Household valuation of smart-home functionalities in Slovenia," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 42-53.
    18. Robert J. Johnston & Kevin J. Boyle & Wiktor (Vic) Adamowicz & Jeff Bennett & Roy Brouwer & Trudy Ann Cameron & W. Michael Hanemann & Nick Hanley & Mandy Ryan & Riccardo Scarpa & Roger Tourangeau & Ch, 2017. "Contemporary Guidance for Stated Preference Studies," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 4(2), pages 319-405.
    19. Ivehammar, Pernilla, 2014. "Valuing environmental quality in actual travel time savings – The Haningeleden road project in Stockholm," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 349-356.
    20. Abay Asfaw & Joachim Braun, 2005. "Innovations in Health Care Financing: New Evidence on the Prospect of Community Health Insurance Schemes in the Rural Areas of Ethiopia," International Journal of Health Economics and Management, Springer, vol. 5(3), pages 241-253, September.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:20:p:8473-:d:427981. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.