Are Agricultural Extension Packages What Ethiopian Farmers Want? A Stated Preference Analysis
There is an evident dichotomy in many rural development policies in the world between extension driven adoption of modern inputs and community driven local public goods. However, the target populations of these policies seldom have the possibility to express their preference between these two policies. In this paper we report the results of a stated preference survey in the highlands of Ethiopia where the farmers are given a choice between an agricultural extension package and a local public good - health care or protected spring. The study finds that a majority of people prefers the public good. However, when the extension package is combined with insurance in terms of no payback of the credit in case of crop loss, then we find a significant increase in the choice of the extension package. The study thus sheds light on why Ethiopia’s major development strategy has had limited success and gives evidence of how stated preference methodologies can be utilized for development policy design.
|Date of creation:||17 Aug 2005|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Department of Economics, School of Business, Economics and Law, University of Gothenburg, Box 640, SE 405 30 GÖTEBORG, Sweden|
Phone: 031-773 10 00
Web page: http://www.handels.gu.se/econ/
More information through EDIRC
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hhs:gunwpe:0172. 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: (Marie Andersson)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.