IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaae23/365966.html

Evaluating the impact of fodder-purchase as drought mitigation strategy for smallholder cattle holdings

Author

Listed:
  • Nketiah, Prince
  • Ntuli, Herbert

Abstract

The study set out to investigate how fodder-purchase as drought response strategy impact smallholder cattle farmers (SCF) cattle inventory during drought years. Information on such mitigation strategy for drought is rare in the literature. We used a pooled survey data obtained from the National Income Dynamics Study (NIDS) collated in the years 2015 and 2017 in South Africa. The nationally representative data was comprised of smallholder cattle households that experienced the 2015 to 2017 widespread drought events of South Africa. Propensity score matching method (PSM) was used for the analysis. Factors that influence SCF decision to adopt fodder purchasing as drought mitigation strategy include age, income, market participation, crop farm ownership, recipients of secondary off-farm income, social support beneficiary and land ownership. The PSM result shows that fodder-purchase has significant and positive impact on smallholder cattle production during drought. Therefore, government policy towards provision of fodder storage infrastructure that would help increase production and improve accessibility during drought emergencies must be encouraged.

Suggested Citation

  • Nketiah, Prince & Ntuli, Herbert, 2023. "Evaluating the impact of fodder-purchase as drought mitigation strategy for smallholder cattle holdings," 2023 Seventh AAAE/60th AEASA Conference, September 18-21, 2023, Durban, South Africa 365966, African Association of Agricultural Economists (AAAE).
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaae23:365966
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.365966
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/365966/files/89.%20Fodder%20in%20South%20Africa.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.365966?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. James Heckman & Hidehiko Ichimura & Jeffrey Smith & Petra Todd, 1998. "Characterizing Selection Bias Using Experimental Data," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 66(5), pages 1017-1098, September.
    2. Elum, Zelda A. & Modise, David M. & Marr, Ana, 2016. "Farmer’s perception of climate change and responsive strategies in three selected provinces of South Africa," Greenwich Papers in Political Economy 16050, University of Greenwich, Greenwich Political Economy Research Centre.
    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. Marianne Simonsen & Lars Skipper & Jeffrey Andrew Smith, 2025. "Welfare Reform: Consequences for the Children," CESifo Working Paper Series 12369, CESifo.
    2. Morgane Innocent & Agnès François-Lecompte & Nolwenn Roudaut, 2020. "Comparison of human versus technological support to reduce domestic electricity consumption in France," Post-Print hal-02450849, HAL.
    3. Matias Busso & Patrick Kline, 2008. "Do Local Economic Development Programs Work? Evidence from the Federal Empowerment Zone Program," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 1639, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    4. Oliver Linton & Pedro Gozalo, 2014. "Testing Conditional Independence Restrictions," Econometric Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(5-6), pages 523-552, August.
    5. Dettmann, E. & Becker, C. & Schmeißer, C., 2011. "Distance functions for matching in small samples," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 55(5), pages 1942-1960, May.
    6. Chabé-Ferret, Sylvain, 2015. "Analysis of the bias of Matching and Difference-in-Difference under alternative earnings and selection processes," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 185(1), pages 110-123.
    7. Cerqua, Augusto & Urwin, Peter & Thomson, Dave & Bibby, David, 2020. "Evaluation of education and training impacts for the unemployed: Challenges of new data," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    8. Tang, Shengfang & Huang, Zhilin, 2022. "Empirical likelihood confidence interval for difference-in-differences estimator with panel data," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 216(C).
    9. Anika Kreutzberg & Rowena Jacobs, 2020. "Improving access to services for psychotic patients: does implementing a waiting time target make a difference," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 21(5), pages 703-716, July.
    10. James J. Heckman, 1991. "Randomization and Social Policy Evaluation Revisited," NBER Technical Working Papers 0107, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Sant’Anna, Pedro H.C. & Zhao, Jun, 2020. "Doubly robust difference-in-differences estimators," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 219(1), pages 101-122.
    12. Brunie, Aurélie & Fumagalli, Laura & Martin, Thomas & Field, Samuel & Rutherford, Diana, 2014. "Can village savings and loan groups be a potential tool in the malnutrition fight? Mixed method findings from Mozambique," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 47(P2), pages 113-120.
    13. Martin Huber, 2019. "An introduction to flexible methods for policy evaluation," Papers 1910.00641, arXiv.org.
    14. Daniel O. Gilligan & John Hoddinott, 2007. "Is There Persistence in the Impact of Emergency Food Aid? Evidence on Consumption, Food Security, and Assets in Rural Ethiopia," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 89(2), pages 225-242.
    15. Schilling, Brian J. & Attavanich, Witsanu & Sullivan, Kevin P. & Marxen, Lucas J., 2014. "Measuring the effect of farmland preservation on farm profitability," MPRA Paper 100122, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised Jun 2014.
    16. Rajeev Dehejia, 2013. "The Porous Dialectic: Experimental and Non-Experimental Methods in Development Economics," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2013-011, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    17. Michael Lechner & Ruth Miquel & Conny Wunsch, 2011. "Long‐Run Effects Of Public Sector Sponsored Training In West Germany," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 9(4), pages 742-784, August.
    18. Michael Gerfin & Michael Lechner, 2002. "A Microeconometric Evaluation of the Active Labour Market Policy in Switzerland," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 112(482), pages 854-893, October.
    19. Galasso, Alberto & Schankerman, Mark & Serrano, Carlos J., 2011. "Trading and enforcing patent rights," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 121732, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    20. Kölling, Arnd, 2013. "Wirtschaftsförderung, Produktivität und betriebliche Arbeitsnachfrage - Eine Kausalanalyse mit Betriebspaneldaten -," VfS Annual Conference 2013 (Duesseldorf): Competition Policy and Regulation in a Global Economic Order 79843, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.

    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:ags:aaae23:365966. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaaeaea.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.