From the ground up: Impacts of a pro-poor community-driven development project in Nigeria
"The community-driven development (CDD) approach has become increasingly popular because of its potential to develop projects that are sustainable, are responsive to local priorities, empower local communities, and more effectively target poor and vulnerable groups. The purpose of this study is to assess the impacts of Fadama II, which is a CDD project and the largest agricultural project in Nigeria. This study used propensity score matching (PSM) to select 1728 comparable project beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries. The study also used double difference methods to compare the impact indicators. Our results show that Fadama II project succeeded in targeting the poor and women farmers in its productive asset acquisition component. Participation in the project also increased the income of beneficiaries by about 60 percent, which is well above the targeted increase of only 20 percent in the six year period of the project. Regarding rural infrastructure investments, we found that the Fadama II project had positive near-term impacts on beneficiaries' access to markets and transportation costs, although the study revealed surprising effects on beneficiaries' commercial behavior and statistically insignificant impacts on nonfarm activities. We also observed that Fadama II increased the demand for postharvest handling technologies but did not have a significant impact on the demand for financial management and market information. Fadama II reduced the demand for soil fertility management technologies. The decline likely reflects the project's focus on providing postproduction advisory services and suggests the need for the project to increase its support for soil fertility management and thus limit the potential for land degradation resulting from increased agricultural productivity. Overall, the Fadama II project has achieved its goal of increasing the incomes of the beneficiaries in the first year of its operation. The project has also succeeded in targeting the poor and vulnerable in its productive-asset component, even though that did not appear to increase significantly short-term household incomes among the poorest asset tercile. The unique feature that could have contributed to the significant impact of the project in a short time is its broad-based approach, which addresses the major constraints limiting the success of CDD projects that address only one or two constraints. This has implications on planning poverty reduction efforts in low-income countries. Given that the poor face numerous constraints, a CDD project that simultaneously addresses many constraints will likely build synergies that will lead to larger impacts than will a project that addresses only one or two constraints. This suggests the need for the government and donors to pool resources and initiate multipronged CDD projects rather than many isolated projects." from Author's Abstract
|Date of creation:||2008|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: 2033 K Street, NW, Washington, DC 20006|
Web page: http://www.ifpri.org/
More information through EDIRC
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Duflo, Esther & Glennerster, Rachel & Kremer, Michael, 2008.
"Using Randomization in Development Economics Research: A Toolkit,"
Handbook of Development Economics,
- Esther Duflo & Rachel Glennerster & Michael Kremer, 2006. "Using Randomization in Development Economics Research: A Toolkit," NBER Technical Working Papers 0333, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Duflo, Esther & Glennerster, Rachel & Kremer, Michael, 2007. "Using Randomization in Development Economics Research: A Toolkit," CEPR Discussion Papers 6059, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Binswanger, Hans P. & Aiyar, Swaminathan, 2003. "Scaling up community-driven development : theoretical underpinnings and program design implications," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3039, The World Bank.
- Mansuri, Ghazala & Rao, Vijayendra, 2004.
"Community-based (and driven) development : A critical review,"
Policy Research Working Paper Series
3209, The World Bank.
- Ghazala Mansuri, 2004. "Community-Based and -Driven Development: A Critical Review," World Bank Research Observer, World Bank Group, vol. 19(1), pages 1-39.
- Conning, Jonathan & Kevane, Michael, 2002. "Community-Based Targeting Mechanisms for Social Safety Nets: A Critical Review," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 375-394, March.
- Khwaja, Asim Ijaz, 2001. "Can Good Projects Succeed in Bad Communities? Collective Action in the Himalayas," Working Paper Series rwp01-043, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
- James Heckman & Hidehiko Ichimura & Jeffrey Smith & Petra Todd, 1998.
"Characterizing Selection Bias Using Experimental Data,"
Econometric Society, vol. 66(5), pages 1017-1098, September.
- James Heckman & Hidehiko Ichimura & Jeffrey Smith & Petra Todd, 1998. "Characterizing Selection Bias Using Experimental Data," NBER Working Papers 6699, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Kleemeier, Elizabeth, 2000. "The Impact of Participation on Sustainability: An Analysis of the Malawi Rural Piped Scheme Program," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 28(5), pages 929-944, May.
- Alston, Julian M. & Pardey, Philip G., 2001.
"Attribution and other problems in assessing the returns to agricultural R&D,"
Agricultural Economics of Agricultural Economists,
International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 25(2-3), September.
- Alston, Julian M. & Pardey, Philip G., 2001. "Attribution and other problems in assessing the returns to agricultural R&D," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 25(2-3), pages 141-152, September.
- Rajeev H. Dehejia & Sadek Wahba, 2002.
"Propensity Score-Matching Methods For Nonexperimental Causal Studies,"
The Review of Economics and Statistics,
MIT Press, vol. 84(1), pages 151-161, February.
- Rajeev H. Dehejia & Sadek Wahba, 1998. "Propensity Score Matching Methods for Non-experimental Causal Studies," NBER Working Papers 6829, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- James J. Heckman & Hidehiko Ichimura & Petra Todd, 1998. "Matching As An Econometric Evaluation Estimator," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 65(2), pages 261-294.
- Berrebi, Z M & Silber, Jacques, 1985. "The Gini Coefficient and Negative Income: A Comment," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 37(3), pages 525-26, September.
- Stich, Andreas, 1996. "Inequality and negative income," Discussion Papers in Econometrics and Statistics 4/96, University of Cologne, Institute of Econometrics and Statistics.
- Chen, Chau-Nan & Tsaur, Tien-Wang & Rhai, Tong-Shieng, 1982. "The Gini Coefficient and Negative Income," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 34(3), pages 473-78, November.
- Jeffrey Smith & Petra Todd, 2003.
"Does Matching Overcome Lalonde's Critique of Nonexperimental Estimators?,"
University of Western Ontario, Centre for Human Capital and Productivity (CHCP) Working Papers
20035, University of Western Ontario, Centre for Human Capital and Productivity (CHCP).
- A. Smith, Jeffrey & E. Todd, Petra, 2005. "Does matching overcome LaLonde's critique of nonexperimental estimators?," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 125(1-2), pages 305-353.
- Jagger, Pamela & Pender, John L., 2003. "Impacts of programs and organizations on the adoption of sustainable land management technologies in Uganda:," EPTD discussion papers 101, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
- Salter, Ammon J. & Martin, Ben R., 2001. "The economic benefits of publicly funded basic research: a critical review," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 509-532, March.
- Marianne Bertrand & Esther Duflo & Sendhil Mullainathan, 2002.
"How Much Should We Trust Differences-in-Differences Estimates?,"
NBER Working Papers
8841, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Marianne Bertrand & Esther Duflo & Sendhil Mullainathan, 2004. "How Much Should We Trust Differences-In-Differences Estimates?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 119(1), pages 249-275.
- Bouman, F. J. A., 1995. "Rotating and accumulating savings and credit associations: A development perspective," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 371-384, March.
- Frances Cleaver, 1999. "Paradoxes of participation: questioning participatory approaches to development," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 11(4), pages 597-612.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:fpr:ifprid:756. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ()
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.