IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/gii/giihei/heidwp12-2012.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Linkage between Outcome Differences in Cotton Production and Rural Roads Improvements - A Matching Approach

Author

Abstract

This paper tests the linkage between a binary treatment (rural road improvement project) and a continuous outcome (cotton productivity) in Zambia’s agro-based Eastern Province as measured by repeated cross-sections of farm-level data from the Zambian post-harvest survey (PHS). We use this PHS dataset, which covers the period from 1996/1997 to 2001/2002 across two phases, the pre-treatment phase (1996/1998) and the treatment phase when the Eastern Province Feeder Road Project (EPFRP) was being implemented (1998/2002). The identification strategy relies on the implementing of matching estimators for all three treatment parameters: Average Treatment Effect (ATE); Treatment on the Treated (TT) and Treatment on the Untreated (TUT), which is crucial in terms of policy relevance (Arcand, 2012). Matching ensures a sub-set of non-project areas that best represents the counterfactual and is done at the same geographic level of aggregation (van de Walle, 2009). Since treatment participation is not by random asignment we use the propensity score as a method to reduce the bias in the estimation of these treatment effects with observational PHS data sets in order to reduce the dimensionality of the matching problem. We find the ATT estimation results are not the same when implementing various matching using ‘the logarithm of (cotton) yield’ compared to using ‘cotton productivity’ as variable. In the latter case the following matching methods all have negative difference between treated and controls: 1-to-1 propensity score matching; k-nearest neighbours matching; radius matching; and 'spline-smoothing'. However, the Kernel matching has positive difference between treated and controls for the ‘productivity’ variable: Finally, some of the local linear regression and the Mahalanobis matching specifications yields positive difference between treated and controls for the ‘logyield’ variable, but not for the ‘productivity’ variable and not for all specifications either. Through our robustness checks of the Matching Assumpion and Sensitivity of Estimates we find that the matching doesn’t reduce the starting unbalancing. The comparison of the simulated ATT and the baseline ATT tells us that the latter is robust. We conclude that the application of various non-parametric matching methods didn’t enable us to identify a robust linkage, most likely due to the PHS data source and the evaluation design. Future rigorous rural roads impact evaluation requires panel (with pre-intervention) data for project and appropriate non-project areas, which allows for an evaluation design that combines a double difference (DID) with controls for initial conditions either through propensity score matching, regression controls or an IV (van de Walle, 2009). Regression discontinuity designs would offer an alternative method for impact evaluation (ADB, 2011; see Arcand, 2012).

Suggested Citation

  • Christian K.M. Kingombe, 2012. "The Linkage between Outcome Differences in Cotton Production and Rural Roads Improvements - A Matching Approach," IHEID Working Papers 12-2012, Economics Section, The Graduate Institute of International Studies.
  • Handle: RePEc:gii:giihei:heidwp12-2012
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://repec.graduateinstitute.ch/pdfs/Working_papers/HEIDWP12-2012.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. LaLonde, Robert J, 1986. "Evaluating the Econometric Evaluations of Training Programs with Experimental Data," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(4), pages 604-620, September.
    2. Michael Lokshin, 2006. "Difference-based semiparametric estimation of partial linear regression models," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 6(3), pages 377-383, September.
    3. 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.
    4. James J. Heckman & Hidehiko Ichimura & Petra E. Todd, 1997. "Matching As An Econometric Evaluation Estimator: Evidence from Evaluating a Job Training Programme," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 64(4), pages 605-654.
    5. Andrea Ichino & Fabrizia Mealli & Tommaso Nannicini, 2008. "From temporary help jobs to permanent employment: what can we learn from matching estimators and their sensitivity?," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(3), pages 305-327.
    6. Kabwe, Stephen & Tschirley, David L., 2007. "Farm Yields and Returns to Farmers From Seed Cotton: Does Zambia Measure Up?," Food Security Collaborative Policy Briefs 54633, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    7. Balat, Jorge F. & Porto, Guido G., 2005. "The WTO Doha Round, cotton sector dynamics, and poverty trends in Zambia," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3697, The World Bank.
    8. Dorward, Andrew & Kydd, Jonathan & Morrison, Jamie & Urey, Ian, 2004. "A Policy Agenda for Pro-Poor Agricultural Growth," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 73-89, January.
    9. Deaton, Angus, 1985. "Panel data from time series of cross-sections," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 30(1-2), pages 109-126.
    10. Austin Nichols, 2009. "Causal inference," DC09 Stata Conference 8, Stata Users Group.
    11. Jonathan Kydd & Andrew Dorward & Jamie Morrison & Georg Cadisch, 2004. "Agricultural development and pro-poor economic growth in sub-Saharan Africa: potential and policy," Oxford Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(1), pages 37-57.
    12. Alberto Abadie & David Drukker & Jane Leber Herr & Guido W. Imbens, 2004. "Implementing matching estimators for average treatment effects in Stata," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 4(3), pages 290-311, September.
    13. Govereh, Jones & Malawo, Emma & Lungu, Tadeyo & Jayne, Thomas S. & Chinyama, Kasweka & Chilonda, Pius, 2009. "Trends and Spatial Distribution of Public Agricultural Spending in Zambia: Implication for Agricultural Productivity Growth," Food Security Collaborative Working Papers 54497, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    14. Marco Caliendo & Sabine Kopeinig, 2008. "Some Practical Guidance For The Implementation Of Propensity Score Matching," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(1), pages 31-72, February.
    15. Irene Brambilla & Guido G. Porto, 2005. "Farm Productivity and Market Structure. Evidence From Cotton Reforms in Zambia," Working Papers 919, Economic Growth Center, Yale University.
    16. Tschirley, David L. & Kabwe, Stephen, 2007. "Increasing Demand For Quality In World Cotton Markets: How Has Zambia Performed?," Food Security Collaborative Policy Briefs 54632, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    17. Kabwe, Stephen & Tschirley, David L., 2007. "Input Credit Provision for Cotton Production: Learning from African Neighbors and Meeting Zambia’s Challenges," Food Security Collaborative Policy Briefs 54635, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    18. Marcel Fafchamps & Ruth Vargas Hill & Aliziki Kaudha & Robert Waggwa Nsibirwa, 2003. "The transmission of international commodity prices to domestic producers," CSAE Working Paper Series 2003-14, Centre for the Study of African Economies, University of Oxford.
    19. Irene Brambilla & Guido G. Porto, 2011. "Market structure, outgrower contracts, and farm output. Evidence from cotton reforms in Zambia," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 63(4), pages 740-766, December.
    20. Beatrice Conradie & Graham Cookson & Colin Thirtle, 2006. "Efficiency And Farm Size In Western Cape Grape Production: Pooling Small Datasets," South African Journal of Economics, Economic Society of South Africa, vol. 74(2), pages 334-343, June.
    21. Block, S. & Timmer, C.P., 1995. "Agriculture and Economic Growth: Conceptual Issues and the Keynian Experience," Papers 498, Harvard - Institute for International Development.
    22. Bellemare, Marc F., 2010. "The Productivity Impacts of de Jure and de Facto Land Rights," MPRA Paper 23639, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    23. Meyer, Bruce D, 1995. "Natural and Quasi-experiments in Economics," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 13(2), pages 151-161, April.
    24. Jorge F. Balat & Guido G. Porto, 2007. "Globalization and Complementary Policies: Poverty Impacts on Rural Zambia," NBER Chapters,in: Globalization and Poverty, pages 373-416 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    25. Edwin Leuven & Barbara Sianesi, 2003. "PSMATCH2: Stata module to perform full Mahalanobis and propensity score matching, common support graphing, and covariate imbalance testing," Statistical Software Components S432001, Boston College Department of Economics, revised 01 Feb 2018.
    26. Owens, Trudy & Hoddinott, John & Kinsey, Bill, 2003. "The Impact of Agricultural Extension on Farm Production in Resettlement Areas of Zimbabwe," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 51(2), pages 337-357, January.
    27. Christopher F Baum, 2006. "An Introduction to Modern Econometrics using Stata," Stata Press books, StataCorp LP, number imeus, April.
    28. Austin Nichols, 2007. "Causal inference with observational data: Regression Discontinuity and related methods in Stata," North American Stata Users' Group Meetings 2007 2, Stata Users Group.
    29. Dorosh, Paul A. & Stifel, David & Minten, Bart, 2003. "Transaction costs and agricultural productivity," MSSD discussion papers 56, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    30. Christian K.M. Kingombe & Salvatore di Falco, 2012. "The Impact of a Feeder Road Project on Cash Crop Production in Zambia’s Eastern Province between 1997 and 2002, Labour Market and Fiscal Policy," IHEID Working Papers 04-2012, Economics Section, The Graduate Institute of International Studies, revised 28 Feb 2012.
    31. Tschirley, David L. & Kabwe, Stephen, 2007. "Cotton in Zambia: 2007 Assessment of its Organization, Performance, Current Policy Initiatives, and Challenges for the Future," Food Security Collaborative Working Papers 54485, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    32. repec:fth:oxesaf:2000-4 is not listed on IDEAS
    33. Owens, Trudy & Hoddinott, John & Kinsey, Bill, 2003. "The Impact of Agricultural Extension on Farm Production in Resettlement Areas of Zimbabwe," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 51(2), pages 337-57, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    cAverage Treatment Effects; Average Treatment on the Treated; Matching Methods; Poor rural area development project; Impact evaluation of cotton productivity; Africa; Zambia (Eastern Province).;

    JEL classification:

    • C2 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables
    • C83 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - Survey Methods; Sampling Methods
    • D2 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations
    • O12 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Microeconomic Analyses of Economic Development
    • O13 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Agriculture; Natural Resources; Environment; Other Primary Products
    • Q12 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Micro Analysis of Farm Firms, Farm Households, and Farm Input Markets
    • R3 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Real Estate Markets, Spatial Production Analysis, and Firm Location

    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:gii:giihei:heidwp12-2012. 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: (Dorina Dobre). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/ieheich.html .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.