The effect of household wealth on the adoption of improved maize varieties in Zambia

Food Policy

Volumn 33, Issue 6, 2008, Pages 550-559

  Langyintuo, Augustine S ^a   Mungoma, Catherine ^b  

^a CIMMYT   (Zimbabwe)

^b Golden Valley Agricultural Research Trust   (Zambia)

Author keywords

Double hurdle model; Improved high yielding maize variety; Technological change; Wealth index; Zambia

Indexed keywords

AGRICULTURAL FINANCE; AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION; HOUSEHOLD INCOME; MAIZE; RURAL ECONOMY; RURAL FINANCE; TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGE; TECHNOLOGY ADOPTION;

AFRICA; SOUTHERN AFRICA; SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA; ZAMBIA;

ZEA MAYS;

EID: 55049131395     PISSN: 03069192     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodpol.2008.04.002     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Adesina A., and Zinnah M. Technology characteristics, farmers' perceptions and adoption decisions a Tobit model application in Sierra Leone. Agricultural Economics 9 (1993) 297-311
2. Aikens M.T., Havens A.E., and Flinn W.L. The Adoption of Innovations the Neglected Role of Institutional Constraints. Mimeograph (1975), Department of Rural Sociology. The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
3. Arndt M., Dalrymple D., and Ruttan V. Resource Allocation in National and International Agricultural Research (1977), Minneapolis University of Minnesota Press
4. Barker R., and Herdts R.W. Equity implications of technology changes. Interpretive Analysis of Selected Papers From Changes in Rice Farming in Selected Areas of Asia (1978), International Rice research Institute (IRRI), Los Banos
5. Baum C.F. An Introduction to Modern Econometrics Using Stata (2006), Stata Press, Lakeway Drive, College Station, Texas, USA
6. Bhalla S.S. Farm and technical change in Indian agriculture. In: Berry R., and Cline W. (Eds). Agrarian Structure and Productivity in Developing Countries (1979), John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore
7. Blundell R., and Meghir C. Bivariate alternatives to the univariate Tobit model. Journal of Econometrics 34 (1987) 179-200
8. Boahene K., Snijders T.A.B., and Folmer H. An integrated socioeconomic analysis of innovation adoption: the case of hybrid cocoa in Ghana. Journal of Policy Modelling 21 2 (1999) 167-184
9. Burton M., Dorsett R., and Young T. Changing Preferences for Meat: evidence from UK household data, 1973-1993. European Review of Agricultural Economics 23 (1996) 357-370
10. Cancien F. Stratification and risk-taking: a theory tested on agricultural innovation. American Sociological Review 32 (1967) 912-927
11. Cragg J. Some statistical models for limited dependent variables with application to the demand for durable goods. Econometrica 39 (1971) 829-844
12. DeWalt B.R. Inequalities in wealth, adoption of technology, and production in a Mexican Ejido. American Ethnologist 2 1 (1975) 149-168 Intra-Cultural Variation (Feb., 1975)
13. Doss C.R. Analyzing technology adoption using microstudies: limitations, challenges, and opportunities for improvement. Agricultural Economics 34 (2006) 207-219
14. Doss C.R., and Morris M.L. How does gender affect the adoption of agricultural innovations? The case of improved maize technology in Ghana. Agricultural Economics 25 (2001) 27-39
15. Ellis F., and Bahiigwa G. Livelihoods and rural poverty reduction in Uganda. World Development 31 6 (2003) 997-1013
16. Feder G., Just R.E., and Zilberman D. Adoption of agricultural innovations in developing countries: a survey. Economic Development and Cultural Change 33 (1985) 255-298
17. Feder G., and Slade R. The acquisition of information and the adoption of new technology. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 66 2 (1984) 312-320
18. Filmer, D., Pritchett, L.H., 1998. The effect of household wealth on educational attainment: demographic and health survey evidence. Policy Research Working Paper1980. The World Bank.
19. Filmer D., and Pritchett L.H. Estimating wealth effects without expenditure data - or tears An application to educational enrollments of India. Demography 38 1 (2001) 115-132
20. Freeman H.A., Ellis F., and Allison E. Livelihoods and rural poverty reduction in Kenya. Development Policy Review 22 2 (2004) 147-171
21. Gerhart J. Diffusion of Hybrid Maize in Western Kenya (1975), International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT), Mexico City
22. Hardaker J.B., Huirne R.B.M., and Anderson J.R. Coping with Risk in Agriculture (1997), CAB International, Wallingford Oxon, UK
23. Herath P.H.M.U., and Takeya H. Factors determining intercropping by rubber smallholders in Sri Lanka: a logit analysis. Agricultural Economics 29 3 (2003) 159-168
24. Jensen H., and Yen S. Food expenditures away from home by type of meal. Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics 44 (1996) 67-80
25. Jones A. A note on computation of the double-hurdle model with dependence with an application to tobacco expenditure. Bulletin of Economic Research 44 (1992) 67-74
26. Just R.E., and Zilberman D. Stochastic structure, farm size and technology adoption in developing countries. Oxford Economic Papers 35 (1983) 307-328
27. Kelly V., Adesina A.A., and Gordon A. Expanding access to agricultural inputs in Africa: a review of recent market development experience. Food Policy 28 (2003) 379-404
28. Kivlin J.E., and Fliegel F.C. Differential perceptions of innovations and rate of adoption. Rural Sociology 32 1 (1967) 78-91
29. Kristjanson P., Okike I., Tarawali S., Singh B.B., and Manyong V.M. Farmers' perceptions of benefits and factors affecting the adoption of improved dual-purpose cowpea in the dry savannas of Nigeria. Agricultural Economics 32 (2003) 195-210
30. Langyintuo, A.S., 2004. Challenges of the seed sector of southern Africa. International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT) Report, Harare, Zimbabwe, p. 39. www.cimmyt.org/gis/rfseedsafrica/.
31. Langyintuo, A.S., Hamazakasa, P., Nawale, E., Jere, I., 2005. Maize production systems in Zambia: setting indicators for impact assessment and targeting. CIMMYT Report, Harare, Zimbabwe.
32. Langyintuo, A.S., Mekuria, M., 2005. Accounting for neighborhood influence in estimating factors determining the adoption of improved agricultural technologies. Selected Paper presented at the American Agricultural Economics Association Annual Meeting, Providence, RI, USA, July 24-27. http://agecon.lib.umn.edu/cgi-bin/pdf_view.pl?paperid=16150&ftype=.pdf (accessed 31.05.07).
33. Lowenberg-DeBoer, J., Abdoulaye, T., Kabore, D., 1994. The opportunity cost of capital for agriculture in the sahel: Case study evidence from Niger and Burkina Faso. Staff Paper. Department of agricultural Economics, Purdue University. West Lafayette, Indiana, USA.
34. Morris, M.L., Tripp, R., Dankyi, A.A., 1999. Adoption and impact of improved maize production technologies. A case study of the Ghana Grains Development Project. Economics Program Paper 99-01. International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT), Mexico. 38 pp.
35. Moser C.O.N. The asset vulnerability framework reassessing urban poverty reduction strategies. World Development 26 1 (1998) 1-19
36. Reardon T., Stamoulis K., Balisacan A., Cruz M.E., Berdegue J., and Banks B. Household income diversification into rural nonfarm activities. In: Haggblade S., Hazell P., and Rearden T. (Eds). Transforming the Rural Nonfarm Economy (2006), John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore
37. Renkow M. Poverty, productivity and production environment: a review of the evidence. Food Policy 25 (2000) 463-478
38. Rosegrant M., and Hazell P. Transforming the Rural Economy of Asia: The Unfinished Revolution (2000), Oxford University Press, Oxford
39. Rosenzweig, M.R., 1978. Schooling, allocative ability and the green revolution. In: Paper presented at the Meeting of Eastern Economic Association. Washington DC.
40. Runge-Metzger, A., 1988. Variability in agronomic practices and allocative efficiency among farm households in northern Ghana: a case study in on-farm research. Nyankpala Agricultural Research Report No. 2. Nyankpala, Tamale, Ghana.
41. Sadoulet E., and de Janvry A. Quantitative Development Policy Analysis (1995), The John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore
42. Schultz T.W. Transforming Traditional Agriculture (1964), Yale University Press, New Have, Conn
43. Schultz T.W. The value of the ability to deal with disequilibrium. Journal of Economic Literature 13 (1975) 827-846
44. Smale M., Just R.E., and Leathers H. Land allocation in HYV adoption models an investigation of alternative models. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 76 (1994) 535-546
45. Thirtle C., Beyers L., Ismael Y., and Piesse J. Can GM-technologies help the poor? the impact of Bt Cotton in Makhathini Flats, KwaZulu-Natal. World Development 31 4 (2003) 717-732
46. Tobin J. Estimation of relationships for limited dependent variables. Econometrica 26 (1958) 24-36
47. Yen S., and Jones A. Household consumption of cheese: an inverse hyperbolic sine double-hurdle model with dependent errors. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 79 (1997) 246-251
48. Zeller M., Sharma M., Henry C., and Lapenu C. An operational method for assessing the poverty outreach performance of development policies and projects results of case studies in Africa Asia and Latin America. World Development 34 3 (2006) 446-464