IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea05/19401.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Private Participation In Agricultural Extension In Nigeria And Benin: Determining The Willingness To Pay For Information

Author

Listed:
  • Horna, J. Daniela
  • Smale, Melinda
  • von Oppen, Matthias

Abstract

A typical private good is defined by its excludability and rivalry characteristics. Information might not generate rivalry among its users. By contrast, excludability is certainly a characteristic of information and its delivery can generate incentives for private participation. This study examines farmers' preferences for seed of new rice varieties and their willingness to pay for related information in villages of Nigeria and Benin. Conjoint analysis is used to estimate the structure of farmers' preferences for rice seed given a set of alternatives. Farmers are considered to be maximizers of utility rather than profit, preferring one variety over another based on the utility they obtain from its attributes, which depends on their own social and economic characteristics. Contingent methods are used to elicit preferences and willingness to pay (WTP) for rice seed. The marginal values of attributes, with and without information about the seed, are estimated with an ordered probit regression. WTP for information is derived from the analysis of WTP for rice seed. The results have implications for the best way to finance research and extension services in the areas of intervention, particularly for new rice varieties.

Suggested Citation

  • Horna, J. Daniela & Smale, Melinda & von Oppen, Matthias, 2005. "Private Participation In Agricultural Extension In Nigeria And Benin: Determining The Willingness To Pay For Information," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19401, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea05:19401
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.19401
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/19401/files/sp05ho01.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.19401?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. John Mackenzie, 1993. "A Comparison of Contingent Preference Models," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 75(3), pages 593-603.
    2. Green, Paul E & Srinivasan, V, 1978. "Conjoint Analysis in Consumer Research: Issues and Outlook," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 5(2), pages 103-123, Se.
    3. Baidu-Forson, Jojo & Ntare, Bonny R. & Waliyar, Farid, 1997. "Utilizing conjoint analysis to design modern crop varieties: Empirical example for groundnut in Niger," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 16(3), pages 219-226, August.
    4. Garth John Holloway & Simeon K. Ehui, 2001. "Demand, Supply and Willingness-to-Pay for Extension Services in an Emerging-Market Setting," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 83(3), pages 764-768.
    5. Dalton, Timothy J., 2004. "A household hedonic model of rice traits: economic values from farmers in West Africa," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 31(2-3), pages 149-159, December.
    6. Akinwumi A. Adesina & Moses M. Zinnah, 1993. "Technology characteristics, farmers' perceptions and adoption decisions: A Tobit model application in Sierra Leone," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 9(4), pages 297-311, December.
    7. Ariel Dinar, 1996. "Extension Commercialization: How Much to Charge for Extension Services," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 78(1), pages 1-12.
    8. Gary Crow, 1997. "Estimating the Values of Cattle Characteristics Using an Ordered Probit Model," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 79(2), pages 463-476.
    9. Baidu-Forson, J. & Waliyar, F. & Ntare, B. R., 1997. "Farmer preferences for socioeconomic and technical interventions in groundnut production system in Niger: Conjoint and ordered probit analyses," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 54(4), pages 463-476, August.
    10. Adesina, Akinwumi A. & Zinnah, Moses M., 1993. "Technology characteristics, farmers' perceptions and adoption decisions: A Tobit model application in Sierra Leone," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 9(4), pages 297-311, December.
    11. Massimiliano Mazzanti, 2003. "Discrete choice models and valuation experiments," Journal of Economic Studies, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 30(6), pages 584-604, October.
    12. Jupiter Ndjeunga & Carl H. Nelson, 2005. "Toward understanding household preference for consumption characteristics of millet varieties: a case study from western Niger," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 32(2), pages 151-165, March.
    13. Jojo Baidu‐Forson & Bonny R. Ntare & Farid Waliyar, 1997. "Utilizing conjoint analysis to design modern crop varieties: empirical example for groundnut in Niger," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 16(3), pages 219-226, August.
    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. Horna, J. Daniela & Smale, Melinda & Oppen, Matthias Von, 2007. "Farmer willingness to pay for seed-related information: rice varieties in Nigeria and Benin," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 12(6), pages 799-825, December.
    2. Caroline Roussy & Aude Ridier & Karim Chaïb, 2014. "Adoption d’innovations par les agriculteurs : rôle des perceptions et des préférences," Post-Print hal-01123427, HAL.
    3. Baidu-Forson, Jojo & Ntare, Bonny R. & Waliyar, Farid, 1997. "Utilizing conjoint analysis to design modern crop varieties: Empirical example for groundnut in Niger," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 16(3), pages 219-226, August.
    4. Blazy, Jean-Marc & Carpentier, Alain & Thomas, Alban, 2011. "The willingness to adopt agro-ecological innovations: Application of choice modelling to Caribbean banana planters," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 140-150.
    5. Milena Pavlova & Wim Groot & Godefridus Merode, 2005. "An Application of Rating Conjoint Analysis to Study the Importance of Quality-, Access- and Price-attributes to Health Care Consumers," Economic Change and Restructuring, Springer, vol. 37(3), pages 267-286, September.
    6. Evelyne Gbénou-Sissinto & Ygué P. Adegbola & Gauthier Biaou & Roch C. Zossou, 2018. "Farmers’ Willingness to Pay for New Storage Technologies for Maize in Northern and Central Benin," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-21, August.
    7. Mahadevan, Renuka & Asafu-Adjaye, John, 2015. "Exploring the potential for green revolution: a choice experiment on maize farmers in Northern Ghana," African Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, African Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 10(3), pages 1-15.
    8. Meressa, Abrha Megos & Navrud, Stale, 2020. "Not my cup of coffee: Farmers’ preferences for coffee variety traits – Lessons for crop breeding in the age of climate change," Bio-based and Applied Economics Journal, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA), vol. 9(3), December.
    9. Astrid Mastenbroek & Irma Sirutyte & Robert Sparrow, 2021. "Information Barriers to Adoption of Agricultural Technologies: Willingness to Pay for Certified Seed of an Open Pollinated Maize Variety in Northern Uganda," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(1), pages 180-201, February.
    10. Mekonnen, Tigist, 2017. "Willingness to pay for agricultural risk insurance as a strategy to adapt climate change," MERIT Working Papers 2017-028, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    11. Tano, Kouadio & Kamuanga, Mulumba & Faminow, Merle D. & Swallow, Brent, 2003. "Using conjoint analysis to estimate farmer's preferences for cattle traits in West Africa," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 393-407, July.
    12. Somda, Jacques & Nianogo, A. Joseph & Nassa, Suleymane & Sanou, Seydou, 2002. "Soil fertility management and socio-economic factors in crop-livestock systems in Burkina Faso: a case study of composting technology," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(2-3), pages 175-183, December.
    13. Ouma, James Okuro & De Groote, Hugo & Owuor, George, 2006. "Determinants of Improved Maize Seed and Fertilizer Use in Kenya: Policy Implications," 2006 Annual Meeting, August 12-18, 2006, Queensland, Australia 25433, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    14. 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.
    15. B Kelsey Jack, "undated". "Market Inefficiencies and the Adoption of Agricultural Technologies in Developing Countries," CID Working Papers 50, Center for International Development at Harvard University.
    16. Ahmad, Babor & Rabbani, M. Golam & Shilpa, Nusrat Afrin & Haque, Mohammad Samiul & Rahman, M. Naimur, 2022. "Diversification Of Livelihoods And Its Impact On The Welfare Of Tribal Households In Dinajpur District Of Bangladesh," Bangladesh Journal of Agricultural Economics, Bangladesh Agricultural University, vol. 43(1), June.
    17. Avila-Santamaria, Jorge J. & Useche, Maria P., 2016. "Urea Subsidies and the Decision to Allocate Land to a New Fertilizing Technology: Ex-ante Analysis in Ecuador," 2016 Annual Meeting, February 6-9, 2016, San Antonio, Texas 229851, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    18. Bai, Junfei & Wahl, Thomas I. & McCluskey, Jill J., 2008. "Fluid milk consumption in urban Qingdao, China," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 52(2), pages 1-15.
    19. Zhihai Yang & Amin W. Mugera & Ning Yin & Yumeng Wang, 2018. "Soil conservation practices and production efficiency of smallholder farms in Central China," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 20(4), pages 1517-1533, August.
    20. Tiziana Pagnani & Elisabetta Gotor & Enoch Kikulwe & Francesco Caracciolo, 2021. "Livelihood assets’ influence on Ugandan farmers’ control practices for Banana Xanthomonas Wilt (BXW)," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 9(1), pages 1-19, December.

    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:aaea05:19401. 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/aaeaaea.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.