IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/cimmew/7687.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Adoption and Use of Improved Maize by Small-Scale Farmers in Southeast Guatemala

Author

Listed:
  • Sain, Gustavo
  • Martinez, Julio

Abstract

This report is based on a study of the adoption and use of improved open-pollinated varieties and hybrids by small-scale farmers in the Department of Jutiapa, Guatemala. The majority of maize producers in Guatemala are small-scale subsistence farmers. Approximately 60% of the basic grains produced in the country are grown on farms that are too small to satisfy the basic nutritional needs of a typical family (5-6 persons). Increasing yields through the use of new technologies is seen as a critical step to ensuring adequate nutrition and increasing farmer income in the area. The study, conducted in June and July 1991, randomly surveyed 208 farmers in 18 municipalities of Jutiapa, apportioned according to the number of farms in each municipality. There was particular interest in assessing the impact of the Project of Generation and Transfer of Agricultural Technology and Seed Production (PROGETTAPS), which was launched in 1986 by the Instituto de Ciencia y Tecnología Agrícolas (ICTA) and the General Directorate of Agricultural Services (DIGESA) with the goal of increasing small-scale farmers access to improved seeds. Study findings reveal a complex pattern of seed use in Jutiapa. Although the farmers there use several types of local and improved maize seed, they seem to prefer and use the local variety known as Arriquin, as well as two improved materials: an open-pollinated variety (B-1) and a hybrid (H-5). The reported forms of acquisition and preferences indicate that most of the farmers use the same material from 1 to 3 sowing seasons. Yield gains and relative prices, two important factors determining the profitability of adoption of new varieties, are adequate. By changing from their local varieties to OPVs and hybrids, farmers most likely can expect yield increases ranging from 35% to 70%. The decision to use improved materials in part or all of the area cropped with maize is associated with a change in the maize cropping system. Results suggest that farmers that sow a plot of maize in monoculture tend to plant the entire area with improved seed, particularly with hybrids. Results also show that the size of the family, taken together with the cropping system, is an important factor influencing the probability of full adoption, particularly of hybrid materials. The findings indicate that the probability of using hybrid materials, either in part or all of a cropped area, increases with farm size. Importantly, results from the estimating model confirmed the trend observed at the aggregate level. PROGETTAPS had a significant impact on the adoption of OPVs in Jutiapa. Farmers that have experience with PROGETTAPS are more likely to adopt OPVs than those who do not have contact with it. Furthermore, the probability of adoption increases with the years of association farmers have had with the program.

Suggested Citation

  • Sain, Gustavo & Martinez, Julio, 1999. "Adoption and Use of Improved Maize by Small-Scale Farmers in Southeast Guatemala," Economics Working Papers 7687, CIMMYT: International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:cimmew:7687
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.7687
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/7687/files/wp99sa02.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.7687?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. Bellon, Mauricio R & Taylor, J Edward, 1993. ""Folk" Soil Taxonomy and the Partial Adoption of New Seed Varieties," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 41(4), pages 763-786, July.
    2. Michael R. Rahm & Wallace E. Huffman, 1984. "The Adoption of Reduced Tillage: The Role of Human Capital and Other Variables," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 66(4), pages 405-413.
    3. 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.
    4. John Belknap & William E. Saupe, 1988. "Farm Family Resources and the Adoption of No-Plow Tillage in Southwestern Wisconsin," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 10(1), pages 13-23.
    5. Melinda Smale & Richard E. Just & Howard D. Leathers, 1994. "Land Allocation in HYV Adoption Models: An Investigation of Alternative Explanations," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 76(3), pages 535-546.
    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. Sheikh, A. D. & Rehman, T. & Yates, C. M., 2003. "Logit models for identifying the factors that influence the uptake of new `no-tillage' technologies by farmers in the rice-wheat and the cotton-wheat farming systems of Pakistan's Punjab," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 75(1), pages 79-95, January.
    2. Arslan, Aslihan & McCarthy, Nancy & Lipper, Leslie & Asfaw, Solomon & Cattaneo, Andrea, 2013. "Adoption and Intensity of Adoption of Conservation Farming Practices in Zambia," Food Security Collaborative Working Papers 147461, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    3. Benin, S. & Smale, M. & Pender, J. & Gebremedhin, B. & Ehui, S., 2004. "The economic determinants of cereal crop diversity on farms in the Ethiopian highlands," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 31(2-3), pages 197-208, December.
    4. Becerril, Javier & Abdulai, Awudu, 2010. "The Impact of Improved Maize Varieties on Poverty in Mexico: A Propensity Score-Matching Approach," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 38(7), pages 1024-1035, July.
    5. Laxmi, Vijay & Mishra, Vinod, 2007. "Factors Affecting the Adoption of Resource Conservation Technology: Case of Zero Tillage in Rice-Wheat Farming Systems," Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, Indian Society of Agricultural Economics, vol. 62(1), pages 1-13.
    6. Van Dusen, M. Eric, 2000. "In Situ Conservation Of Crop Genetic Resources In The Mexican Milpa System," Dissertations 11941, University of California, Davis, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    7. S?ren Marcus Pedersen & Kim Martin Lind & Orjon Xhoxhi & Attila Yazar & Sven-Erik Jacobsen & Jens Erik ?rum, 2020. "Introducing quinoa in Turkey - farmers perception in the region of Adana," Economia agro-alimentare, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 22(1), pages 1-24.
    8. Benin, Samuel & Gebremedhin, Berhanu & Smale, Melinda & Pender, John L. & Ehui, Simeon, 2003. "Determinants of cereal diversity in communities and on household farms of the Northern Ethiopian Highlands:," EPTD discussion papers 105, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    9. Lapar, Ma. Lucila A. & Pandey, Sushil, 1999. "Adoption of soil conservation: the case of the Philippine uplands," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 21(3), pages 241-256, December.
    10. Aloyce R.M. Kaliba & Allen M. Featherstone & David W. Norman, 1997. "A stall‐feeding management for improved cattle in semiarid central Tanzania: factors influencing adoption," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 17(2-3), pages 133-146, December.
    11. Arslan, AslIhan, 2011. "Shadow vs. market prices in explaining land allocation: Subsistence maize cultivation in rural Mexico," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 605-613, October.
    12. Langyintuo, Augustine S. & Mungoma, Catherine, 2008. "The effect of household wealth on the adoption of improved maize varieties in Zambia," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 550-559, December.
    13. Nadella, Karthik & Deaton, Brady & Lawley, Chad & Weersink, Alfons, 2014. "Do farmers treat rented land differently than the land they own? A fixed effects model of farmer’s decision to adopt conservation practices on owned and rented land," 2014 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2014, Minneapolis, Minnesota 170633, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    14. Ridier, Aude & Roussy, Caroline & Chaib, Karim, 2021. "Adoption of crop diversification by specialized grain farmers in south-western France: evidence from a choice-modelling experiment," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), vol. 102(1), April.
    15. Wang, H. Holly & Young, Douglas L. & Camara, Oumou M., 2000. "The Role Of Environmental Education In Predicting Adoption Of Wind Erosion Control Practices," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 25(2), pages 1-12, December.
    16. Micheels, Eric T. & Nolan, James F., 2016. "Examining the effects of absorptive capacity and social capital on the adoption of agricultural innovations: A Canadian Prairie case study," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 127-138.
    17. Norris, Patricia E. & Batie, Sandra S., 1987. "Virginia Farmers' Soil Conservation Decisions: An Application Of Tobit Analysis," Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 19(1), pages 1-12, July.
    18. Fernandez-Cornejo, Jorge & Beach, E. Douglas & Huang, Wen-Yuan, 1992. "The Influence of Grower Attributes on the Adoption of IPM Techniques in Vegetable Production in Three States," WAEA/ WFEA Conference Archive (1929-1995) 321393, Western Agricultural Economics Association.
    19. Madhu Khanna, 2001. "Sequential Adoption of Site-Specific Technologies and its Implications for Nitrogen Productivity: A Double Selectivity Model," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 83(1), pages 35-51.
    20. Arellanes, Peter & Lee, David R., 2003. "The Determinants Of Adoption Of Sustainable Agriculture Technologies: Evidence From The Hillsides Of Honduras," 2003 Annual Meeting, August 16-22, 2003, Durban, South Africa 25826, International Association of Agricultural Economists.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Crop Production/Industries;

    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:cimmew:7687. 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/cimmymx.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.