IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/zbw/espost/289578.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Intra-household gender dynamics and the adoption of best practices among teff farmers in Ethiopia

Author

Listed:
  • Lungu, Ioana
  • DiGiacomo, John
  • Vicini, Marco
  • Ahner-McHaffie, Tessa
  • Baensch, Laura
  • Muttai, Mercy
  • Degie, Bruk
  • Liyhe, Melese
  • Thamari, Mary
  • Getachew, Minas

Abstract

Teff farming in Ethiopia is commonly seen as being dominated by men, with women playing supporting roles on some aspects of the growing process. This study is rooted in existing literature on drivers of Best Practices (BP) adoption and decision-making theory and is unique in that it focuses primarily on understanding how gender-specific factors influence decision-making on the adoption of BPs. To this end, the study assessed the intra-household gender dynamics at play within farming households in Amhara, Ethiopia, and their influence on deciding whether or not to adopt agricultural best practices for teff farming. These gender dynamics include the division of labor between women and men, intra-household decisionmaking processes, social and cultural norms and access factors (such as access to information, training, credit and control over income). Using data from a threeround quantitative survey with one woman and one man in 555 households, as well as focus group discussions and in-depth interviews, this study is uniquely placed to assess the impact of these gender-specific and intra-household factors on the adoption of best practices. The findings show that households where women are more involved in teff farming, have less input into decision-making, less control over income, and more access to information and adopt on average more best practices. However, there is significant heterogeneity when looking at individual best practices, with women’s decision-making power or access to resources particularly important for specific practices such as sowing in rows. This study implies that designing more gender-sensitive agricultural programs and extension services in Ethiopia – specifically on practices relevant to women and men – can increase best practice adoption, with the ultimate aim of increasing productivity and income for teff farming households, and empowering women. Since male and female farmers are involved in different practices, access to resources and decision-making power have different impacts depending on the gender of the respondent and the practice analyzed, and there is no “one size fits all” solution to improve teff farming productivity.

Suggested Citation

  • Lungu, Ioana & DiGiacomo, John & Vicini, Marco & Ahner-McHaffie, Tessa & Baensch, Laura & Muttai, Mercy & Degie, Bruk & Liyhe, Melese & Thamari, Mary & Getachew, Minas, 2024. "Intra-household gender dynamics and the adoption of best practices among teff farmers in Ethiopia," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 24(3), pages 25749-25781.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:espost:289578
    DOI: 10.18697/ajfand.128.24295
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/289578/1/Lungu-Intra-household-gender-dynamics.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.18697/ajfand.128.24295?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. Bjorvatn, Kjetil & Getahun, Tigabu Degu & Halvorsen, Sandra Kristine, 2020. "Conflict or cooperation? Experimental evidence on intra-household allocations in Ethiopia," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    2. World Bank, 2010. "Gender and Governance in Rural Services : Insights from India, Ghana, and Ethiopia," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 2410, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Joyous S. Tata & Paul E. McNamara, 2016. "Social Factors That Influence Use of ICT in Agricultural Extension in Southern Africa," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 6(2), pages 1-10, April.
    2. Andre Croppenstedt & Markus Goldstein & Nina Rosas, 2013. "Gender and Agriculture: Inefficiencies, Segregation, and Low Productivity Traps," The World Bank Research Observer, World Bank, vol. 28(1), pages 79-109, February.
    3. Nolan Ritter & Julia Anna Bingler, 2021. "Do homo sapiens know their prices? Insights on dysfunctional price mechanisms from a large field experiment," CER-ETH Economics working paper series 21/348, CER-ETH - Center of Economic Research (CER-ETH) at ETH Zurich.
    4. Subert, Moses Peter, 2017. "Perceptions Of Enhanced Freshness Formulation Technologies And Adoption Decisions Among Smallholder Banana Farmers In Morogoro, Tanzania," Research Theses 276437, Collaborative Masters Program in Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    5. Landmann, D. & Feil, J.-H. & Lagerkvist, C.J. & Otter, V., 2018. "Designing capacity development activities of small-scale farmers in developing countries based on discrete choice experiments," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277738, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    6. Kansiime, Monica K. & Alawy, Abdillahi & Allen, Catherine & Subharwal, Manish & Jadhav, Arun & Parr, Martin, 2019. "Effectiveness of mobile agri-advisory service extension model: Evidence from Direct2Farm program in India," World Development Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 13(C), pages 25-33.
    7. Li Zhang, 2020. "From left behind to leader: gender, agency, and food sovereignty in China," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 37(4), pages 1111-1123, December.
    8. Bryan, Elizabeth & Behrman, Julia A., 2013. "Community–based adaptation to climate change: A theoretical framework, overview of key issues and discussion of gender differentiated priorities and participation," CAPRi working papers 109, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    9. Junpeng Li & Puneet Vatsa & Wanglin Ma, 2023. "Small Acts With Big Impacts: Does Garbage Classification Improve Subjective Well-Being in Rural China?," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 18(3), pages 1337-1363, June.
    10. repec:unu:wpaper:wp2012-55 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Peterman, Amber & Behrman, Julia & Quisumbing, Agnes, 2010. "A review of empirical evidence on gender differences in nonland agricultural inputs, technology, and services in developing countries," IFPRI discussion papers 975, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    12. Charlotte Ringdal & Ingrid Hoem Sjursen, 2021. "Household Bargaining and Spending on Children: Experimental Evidence from Tanzania," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 88(350), pages 430-455, April.
    13. Peterman, A., 2010. "A review of empirical evidence on gender differences in nonland agricultural inputs, technology, and services in developing countries," IWMI Working Papers H043605, International Water Management Institute.
    14. Sun, Yan & Asante, Felix & Birner, Regina, 2010. "Opportunities and challenges of community-based rural drinking water supplies: An analysis of water and sanitation committees in Ghana," IFPRI discussion papers 1026, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    15. Ragasa, Catherine, 2012. "Gender and Institutional Dimensions of Agricultural Technology Adoption: A Review of Literature and Synthesis of 35 Case Studies," 2012 Conference, August 18-24, 2012, Foz do Iguacu, Brazil 126747, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    16. Mogues, Tewodaj & Erman, Alvina, 2016. "Institutional arrangements to make public spending responsive to the poor—(where) have they worked?: Review of the evidence on four major intervention types," IFPRI discussion papers 1519, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    17. Ndlovu, P.N. & Thamaga-Chitja, J.M. & Ojo, T.O., 2021. "Factors influencing the level of vegetable value chain participation and implications on smallholder farmers in Swayimane KwaZulu-Natal," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    18. Niu, Chiyu & Ragasa, Catherine, 2018. "Selective attention and information loss in the lab-to-farm knowledge chain: The case of Malawian agricultural extension programs," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 147-163.
    19. Ulrike Müller, 2012. "Pro-poor Service Delivery and Social Identity," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2012-055, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    20. Davis, Kristin & Babu, Suresh Chandra & Blom, Sylvia, 2014. "Building the resilience of smallholders through extension and advisory services:," IFPRI book chapters, in: Fan, Shenggen & Pandya-Lorch, Rajul & Yosef, Sivan (ed.), 2013 Global Food Policy Report, chapter 15, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    21. Independent Evaluation Group, 2011. "Growth and Productivity in Agriculture and Agribusiness : Evaluative Lessons from World Bank Group Experience," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 2279, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    intra-household dynamics; decision-making; gender roles; best practice adoption; teff farming; extension models;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O13 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Agriculture; Natural Resources; Environment; Other Primary Products
    • O12 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Microeconomic Analyses of Economic Development
    • D13 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Household Production and Intrahouse Allocation
    • Q16 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - R&D; Agricultural Technology; Biofuels; Agricultural Extension Services

    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:zbw:espost:289578. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/zbwkide.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.