IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/csa/wpaper/2010-37.html

Heterogeneous returns and the persistence of agricultural technology adoption

Author

Listed:
  • Andrew Zeitlin
  • Stefano Caria
  • Richman Dzene
  • Petr Janský
  • Emmanuel Opoku
  • Francis Teal

Abstract

In this paper we explore whether low rates of sustained technology use can be explained by heterogeneity in returns to adoption. To do so we evaluate impacts of the Cocoa Abrabopa Association, which provided a package of fertilizer and other inputs on credit to cocoa farmers in Ghana. High estimated average productive impacts for treated farmers are found to be consistent with negative economic profits for a substantial proportion of the treated population. By constructing an individual specific measure of returns,we demonstrate that low realized returns among adopters are associated with low retention rates, even after conditioning on output levels and successful repayment. The results are consistent with the hypothesis that high average returns mask substantial and persistent heterogeneity, and that farmers experiment in order to learn about their idiosyncratic returns.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrew Zeitlin & Stefano Caria & Richman Dzene & Petr Janský & Emmanuel Opoku & Francis Teal, 2010. "Heterogeneous returns and the persistence of agricultural technology adoption," CSAE Working Paper Series 2010-37, Centre for the Study of African Economies, University of Oxford.
  • Handle: RePEc:csa:wpaper:2010-37
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:a6841806-05bf-4541-ba2f-63a2f64bc99d
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:wbk:wbpubs:4387 is not listed on IDEAS
    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. Negash, Martha & Swinnen, Johan F.M., 2013. "Biofuels and food security: Micro-evidence from Ethiopia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 963-976.
    2. Caria, A. Stefano & Tamru, Seneshaw & Bizuneh, Gera, 2011. "Food security without food transfers? A CGE analysis for Ethiopia of the different food security impacts of fertilizer subsidies and locally sourced food transfers," IFPRI discussion papers 1106, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    3. Jared Hutchins & Brent Hueth & Guilherme Rosa, 2019. "Quantifying Heterogeneous Returns to Genetic Selection: Evidence from Wisconsin Dairies," NBER Chapters, in: Economics of Research and Innovation in Agriculture, pages 81-105, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Sakos, Grayson & Cerulli, Giovanni & Garbero, Alessandra, 2021. "Beyond the ATE: Idiosyncratic Effect Estimation to Uncover Distributional Impacts Results from 17 Impact Evaluations," 2021 Annual Meeting, August 1-3, Austin, Texas 314017, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    5. Matsumoto, Tomoya, 2014. "Disseminating new farming practices among small scale farmers: An experimental intervention in Uganda," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 43-74.
    6. Kelvin Mulungu & Zewdu Ayalew Abro & Wambui Beatrice Muriithi & Menale Kassie & Miachael Kidoido & Subramanian Sevgan & Samira Mohamed & Chrysantus Tanga & Fathiya Khamis, 2024. "One size does not fit all: Heterogeneous economic impact of integrated pest management practices for mango fruit flies in Kenya—a machine learning approach," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 75(1), pages 261-279, February.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • O13 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Agriculture; Natural Resources; Environment; Other Primary Products
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes
    • Q12 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Micro Analysis of Farm Firms, Farm Households, and Farm Input Markets
    • Q16 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - R&D; Agricultural Technology; Biofuels; Agricultural Extension Services

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:csa:wpaper:2010-37. 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: Julia Coffey (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/csaoxuk.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.