The impact of improved maize varieties on poverty in Mexico: A propensity score-matching approach

World Development

Volumn 38, Issue 7, 2010, Pages 1024-1035

  Becerril, Javier ^a   Abdulai, Awudu ^b  

^a UNIVERSIDAD AUTÓNOMA DE YUCATÁN   (Mexico)

^b UNIVERSITY OF KIEL   (Germany)

Author keywords

Impact assessment; Maize; Mexico; Propensity score matching; Technology adoption

Indexed keywords

EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT; HOUSEHOLD INCOME; MAIZE; POVERTY; TECHNOLOGY ADOPTION;

MEXICO [NORTH AMERICA];

ZEA MAYS;

EID: 77952545044     PISSN: 0305750X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2009.11.017     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Abdulai A., Huffman W.E. The diffusion of new agricultural technologies: The case of crossbred cow technology in Tanzania. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 2005, 87(3):: 645-659.
2. Bellon M.R., Taylor J.E. " Folk" soil taxonomy and the partial adoption of new seed varieties. Economic Development and Cultural Change 1993, 41(4):: 763-786.
3. Bellon M.R., Risopoulos J. Small-scale farmers expand the benefits of improved maize germplasm: A case study from Chiapas, Mexico. World Development 2001, 29(5):799-811.
4. Bellon M.R., Adato M., Becerril J., Mindek D. Poor farmers' perceived benefits from different types of maize germplasm: The case of creolization in lowland tropical Mexico. World Development 2006, 34(1):113-129.
5. Binswanger H.P., von Braun J. Technological change and commercialization in agriculture: The effect on the poor. World Bank Research Observer 1991, 6(1):57-80.
6. Blundell R., Costa-Dias M. Evaluation methods for non-experimental data. Fiscal Studies 2000, 21:427-468.
7. Caliendo M., Kopeinig S. Some practical guidance for the implementation of propensity score matching. Journal of Economic Surveys 2008, 22(1):31-72.
8. CIMMYT (International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center) (2007). World maize facts and trends 2006-2007 unpublished manuscript. Mexico, DF: Mexico.
9. de Janvry A., Sadoulet E. World poverty and the role of agricultural technology: Direct and indirect effects. Journal of Development Studies 2001, 38(4):1-26.
10. Dehejia R.H., Wahba S. Propensity score-matching methods for nonexperimental causal studies. The Review of Economics and Statistics 2002, 84(1):151-161.
11. DiPrete T.A., Gangl M. Assessing bias in the estimation of causal effects: Rosenbaum bounds of matching estimators and instrumental variables estimation with imperfect instruments 2004, (p. 41), Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung, Berlin.
12. Evenson R.E., Gollin D. Crop variety improvement and its effect on productivity: The impact of international agricultural research 2003, CABI, Oxon.
13. Feder G., Just R.E., Zilberman D. Adoption of agricultural innovations in developing countries: A survey. Economic Development and Cultural Change 1985, 33(2):: 255-298.
14. Heckman J., Ichimura H., Todd P. Matching as an econometric evaluation estimator. Review of Economic Studies 1997, 65(2):261-294.
15. Jalan J., Ravallion M. Does piped water reduce diarrhea for children in rural India?. Journal of Econometrics 2003, 112:153-173.
16. Just R.E., Zilberman D. The effects of agricultural development policies on income distribution and technological change in agriculture. Journal of Development Economics 1988, 28(2):: 193-216.
17. Karanja D.D., Renkow M., Crawford E.W. Welfare effects of maize technologies in marginal and high potential regions of Kenya. Agricultural Economics 2003, 29:331-341.
18. Keleman A., Hellin J., Bellon M.R. Maize diversity, rural development policy, and farmers' practices: Lessons from Chiapas, Mexico. The Geographical Journal 2009, 175(1):: 52-70.
19. Lee, W. (2008). Propensity score matching and variations on the balancing test. In Third conference on policy evaluation, ZEW, Mannheim, Germany, 27-28 October.
20. Leuven, E., & Sianesi, B. (2003). PSMATCH2 Stata Module to Perform Full Mahalanobis and Propensity Score Matching, Common Support Graphing, and Covariate Imbalance Testing. URL http://ideas.repec.org/c/boc/bocode/s432001.html.
21. Mendola M. Agricultural technology adoption and poverty reduction: A propensity-score matching analysis for rural Bangladesh. Food Policy 2007, 32(3):372-393.
22. Mojo S., Norton G.W., Alwang J., Rhinehart I., Deom C.M. Peanut research and poverty reduction: Impacts of variety improvement to control peanut viruses in Uganda. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 2007, 89(2):: 448-460.
23. Morris M.L. Impacts of international maize breeding research in developing countries, 1966-1997 2002, CIMMYT, Mexico, DF.
24. Morris, M. L., Tripp, R., & Dankyi, A. A. (1999). Adoption and impacts of improved maize production technology: A case study of the grains development project. CIMMYT Economics Working Paper, 99-01, CIMMYT, Mexico, DF.
25. Rosenbaum P.R. Observational studies 2002, Springer, New York.
26. Rosenbaum P.R., Rubin D.B. The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrica 1983, 70(1):41-55.
27. Sadoulet E., de Janvry A. Quantitative development policy analysis 1995, The Johns Hopkins University Press, USA.
28. Sianesi B. An evaluation of the Swedish system of active labor market programs in the 1990s. The Review of Economics and Statistics 2004, 86(1):133-155.
29. Skoufias E., Davis B., Behrman J.R. An evaluation of the selection of beneficiary households in the education, health, and nutrition program (PROGRESA) of Mexico 1999, IFPRI, Washington, DC.
30. Smale M., Bellon M.R., Aguirre J.A., Rosas M.I., Mendoza J., Solano A.M., Martinez R., Ramirez A., Berthud J. The economic costs and benefits of a participatory project to conserve maize landraces on farms in Oaxaca, Mexico. Agricultural Economics 2003, 29:265-275.
31. Smale M., Just R.E., Leathers H.D. Land allocation in HYV adoption models: An investigation of alternative explanations. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 1994, 76(4):: 535-546.
32. Smith J.A., Todd P.E. Does matching overcome LaLonde's critique of nonexperimental estimators?. Journal of Econometrics 2005, 125(1-2):305-353.
33. Wooldridge J.M. Violating ignorability of treatment by controlling for too many factors. Econometric Theory 2005, 21:1026-1028.