IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/ajagec/v101y2019i1p1-16..html

Estimating the Productivity Impacts of Technology Adoption in the Presence of Misclassification

Author

Listed:
  • Tesfamicheal Wossen
  • Tahirou Abdoulaye
  • Arega Alene
  • Pierre Nguimkeu
  • Shiferaw Feleke
  • Ismail Y Rabbi
  • Mekbib G Haile
  • Victor Manyong

Abstract

This article examines the impact that misreporting adoption status has on the identification and estimation of causal effects on productivity. In particular, by comparing measurement error-ridden self-reported adoption data with measurement-error-free DNA-fingerprinted adoption data, we investigate the extent to which such errors bias the causal effects of adoption on productivity. Taking DNA-fingerprinted adoption data as a benchmark, we find 25% “false negatives” and 10% “false positives” in farmers’ responses. Our results show that misreporting of adoption status is not exogenous to household characteristics, and produces a bias of about 22 percentage points in the productivity impact of adoption. Ignoring inherent behavioral adjustments of farmers based on perceived adoption status has a bias of 13 percentage points. The results of this article underscore the crucial role that correct measurement of adoption plays in designing policy interventions that address constraints to technology adoption in agriculture.

Suggested Citation

  • Tesfamicheal Wossen & Tahirou Abdoulaye & Arega Alene & Pierre Nguimkeu & Shiferaw Feleke & Ismail Y Rabbi & Mekbib G Haile & Victor Manyong, 2019. "Estimating the Productivity Impacts of Technology Adoption in the Presence of Misclassification," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 101(1), pages 1-16.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:ajagec:v:101:y:2019:i:1:p:1-16.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/ajae/aay017
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:oup:ajagec:v:101:y:2019:i:1:p:1-16.. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.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.