-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
1/78
Guidance and Technology: An
Assessment of Project Interventionand Promoted Technologies
Justin D. McKinley
International Rice Research Institute
Social Sciences Division
Los Baos, Philippines
July 18, 2012
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
2/78
Outline
Part one CSISA study
Part two Personal Experiences
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
3/78
PART ONE
CSISA STUDY
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
4/78
Outline
Introduction CSISA
Conservation Agriculture
Selection Bias
Methodology
Cost and Return
Propensity Score Matching
Cost Efficiency
Results
Conclusions
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
5/78
INTRODUCTION
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
6/78
CSISA
Cereal Systems Initiative for South Asia Primarily Funded By:
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
USAID
Goals of project: Decrease hunger and malnutrition
Increase food and income security
For resource-poor farm families in South Asia
Through the accelerated development and
deployment of: New varieties,
Sustainable management technologies, and
Policies
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
7/78
CSISA
IRRI International Rice Research Institute
IFPRI
International Food Policy Research Institute
ILRI
International Livestock Research Institute
CIMMYT
International Maize and Wheat ImprovementCenter
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
8/78
Project Area
CSISA
India
Nepal
Pakistan Bangladesh
Cost & Return Survey
Eastern Uttar Pradesh
Bihar
IRRI GIS Lab
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
9/78
Project Area
Kharif Season
Wet
Rice
Rabi Season
Winter
Wheat
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
10/78
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
11/78
Resource-Conserving Technologies
DIRECT-SEEDED RICE TRANSPLANTING
Flickr Photo By: IRRI ImagesFlickr Photo By: IRRI Images
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
12/78
Direct-Seeded Rice
Reductions in
Labor
Irrigation
Cost of CropEstablishment
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
13/78
Resource-Conserving Technologies
ZERO TILLAGE CONVENTIONAL TILLAGE
Flickr Photo By: CIMMYT Flickr Photo By: IRRI Images
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
14/78
Resource-Conserving Technologies
Reduced Labor
Reduced Diesel
Improved Soil Quality
Flickr Photo By: CIMMYT
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
15/78
Intervention Class
With intervention Trainings
Access to technology
Subsidy (sometimes)
Follow CSISA promotedtechnologies / practices
Without intervention
Control group
Sometimes engage inresource conservingtechnologies / practices
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
16/78
Goal of Study
Investigate which factors make a farmer:
More cost efficient
Have higher net returns
Are the farmers in the CSISA project doing
better because:
They use the promoted technologies?
They receive guidance from the project?
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
17/78
Goal of Study (Cont.)
To answer the question compare two groups:
CSISA-beneficiaries vs. non-beneficiaries
Non-CSISA ZT users vs. non-CSISA non-ZT users
Compare the results of these groups.
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
18/78
Sampling Procedure
Stratified random
Sampling
However, restricted to a
list of pre-selectedcandidates
Issue of selection bias
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
19/78
Propensity Score Matching (PSM)
Used when treatment cannot be randomized.
Match control to treatment group based on
OBSERVABLE characteristics.
Literature is not clear on what characteristics
should be used when determining PSM.
However, should be based on characteristics not
affected by the program
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
20/78
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
21/78
Selected Characteristics
Probit estimation to determine the probability that a
respondent would participate in the project based on:
caste
size of sample plot(ha)
household size
total farm size(ha)
age
education attainment
primary occupation
farming experience
cropping system
production system (lowland-
upland)
money borrowed
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
22/78
METHODOLOGY
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
23/78
Cost and Return
Gross returns minus
Paid-out costs
Imputed Costs
SQXQPNR j
n
j
jw
n
w
w
11
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
24/78
Cost Efficiency
C= Cost of production
x= Vector of input prices and output V ~ N(0,2v), iid, independent of,
U ~ N(0, 2u), non-negative, normally
distributed accounting for inefficiency
)(lnln 0 UVxC
k
k
ko ZU
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
25/78
Propensity Score Matching
Predict probability of participation Treated
Control
Propensity scores Kernel matching
Nearest neighbor
1-1, 10-1, n-1 With or without replacement
)()1( XPTXP
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
26/78
RESULTS
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
27/78
Results of PSM
Untreated TreatedWithout
Intervention With Intervention With Intervention
(n=124) (n=242) (n=124)
Gender (%)
Male 100.00 100.00 100.00
Female 0.00 0.00 0.00
Marital Status (%)
Married 96.77 95.45 96.77
Single/Widowed 3.23 4.55 3.23
Primary Occupation (%)
Farming 92.74 88.43* 95.97
Other 7.26 11.57* 4.03
Type of household (%)
Absolute nuclear 51.61 55.79 54.03
Extended family 48.39 44.21 45.97
Age (years) 51.22 48.91* 50.36
Years in school 9.88 11.63*** 9.85
Household size (persons) 7.98 7.79 7.78
Farming experience (years) 28.45 27.84 28.4
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
28/78
Results of PSM
Untreated TreatedZT-wheat
group
Control
group
ZT-wheat
group
Control
group
(n=40) (n=84) (n=32) (n=32)
Gender (%)
Male 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00
Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Marital Status (%)
Married 97.50 96.42 96.88 100.00
Single/Widowed 2.50 3.58 3.12 0.00
Primary Occupation (%)
Farming 95.00 91.67 93.75 93.75
Other 5.00 8.33 6.25 6.25
Type of household (%)
Absolute nuclear 47.50 53.57 46.88 50.00Extended family 52.50 46.43 53.12 50.00
Age (years) 46.53 53.45*** 49.72 48.88
Years in school 11.95 8.89*** 11.81 11.72
Household size (persons) 6.75 8.57*** 7.09 8.34*
Farming experience (years) 25.98 29.63* 28.03 26.43
.01
.02
.03
.04
.05
50 60 70 80 90x
control treated
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
29/78
CSISA Cost and ReturnUntreated Treated
Without
interventionWith intervention With intervention
(n=124) (n=242) (n=124)
Production-
Yield 3.4 3.75*** 3.70***
Farm gate price 10,446.77 10,525.70 10,530.09
Value of Cereal ( A ) 35,505.82 39,475.94*** 38,964.57***
Paid out costs-
Seed 3,023.23 2,030.60*** 2,035.57***
Fertilizer 3,498.42 3,269.87** 3,188.08***Insecticide 27.14 25.12 26.29
Herbicide 337.83 287.35 268.32
Fungicide 5.34 4.16 3.01
Non-chemical 891.83 831.38 871.65
Labor 4,627.96 4,277.80 4,260.59**
Machine 7,741.28 5,226.36*** 4,916.81***
Total paid out ( B ) 20,153.03 15,952.65*** 15,570.32***
Imputed costs-
Material subsidies 44.24 338.12*** 283.96***
Machine subsidies - 2.55*** 2.808***
Total subsidies 44.24 340.67*** 286.77***
Imputed labor 2,276.99 998.79*** 1,021.25***
Total imputed ( C ) 2,365.47 1,339.46*** 1,654.23**
Net returns-
Gross returns - paid out costs (A-B) 15,352.78 23,523.29***
23,394.25***
Gross returns - total costs (A-(B+C)) 13,031.55 22,183.83*** 22,086.23***
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
30/78
CSISA Cost and Return
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
31/78
0
.5
1
1.5
1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5cost efficiency
CSISA group Control group
CSISA Cost Efficiency
CSISA Farmers: 1.64
Control Farmers: 2.15
*1% level of significance
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
32/78
ZT Adopter Cost and ReturnUntreated Treated
ZT-wheat group
(n=40)
Control group
(n=84)
ZT-wheat
group (n=32)
Control group
(n=32)
Production-
Yield 3.18 3.51*** 3.20 3.31
Farm gate price 10,637.50 10,355.95*** 10,650.00 10,525.00
Value of Cereal ( A ) 33,765.94 36,334.33** 34,063.99 34,860.80
Paid out costs-
Seed 2,534.23 3,256.09*** 2,589.46 3,134.46**
Fertilizer 3,315.86 3,585.36* 3,392.78 3,620.34Insecticide 54.77 13.99** 68.46 21.09
Herbicide 252.62 378.40* 267.35 199.64
Fungicide 16.56 0.00* 20.70 0.00
Non-chemical 2,082.57 324.81*** 2,201.27 593.35***
Labor 4,005.20 4,924.51* 4,179.51 5,003.92
Machine 4,600.03 9,237.12*** 4941.54 8,142.89***
Total paid out ( B ) 16,861.83 21,720.27*** 17,661.08 20,715.69***
Imputed costs-
Material subsidies 137.14 - 92.66 -
Machine subsidies - - - -
Total subsidies 137.14 - 92.66 -
Imputed labor 828.60 2,966.70*** 1,012.58 1,939.15**
Total imputed ( C ) 965.74 2,966.70*** 1,105.25 1,939.15*
Gross Returns-
-paid out costs (A-B) 16,904.10 14,614.06*** 16,402.91 14,145.10*-total costs (A-(B+C)) 15,938.36 11,647.36*** 15,297.66 12,205.95**
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
33/78
ZT Adopter Cost and Return
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
34/78
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
35/78
CONCLUSION
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
36/78
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
37/78
Guidance or Technology?
CSISA-guidance may have a more substantial
role in the performance of farmers than the
use of the ZT-wheat technology.
Meaning, the technology is only as useful as
the farmers understanding of how to use it
properly.
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
38/78
Limitations
Under-sample of control group
Small sample in technology comparison
Limits use of PSM
Over-sampled control in current survey Only corrects for observable characteristics
Use of Greene(2010) in current study
Short time-series limits applicable methodology
Completing 6th season and hope to continue
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
39/78
PART TWO
PERSONAL EXPERIENCES
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
40/78
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
41/78
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
42/78
Noble Township, Michigan
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
43/78
Noble Township, Michigan
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
44/78
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
45/78
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
46/78
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
47/78
Photo By: Adam Sparks
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
48/78
Accomplishments
Restructured CnR Survey 3 Conference Posters
7 Conference Papers
2 Journal Papers
3 Under Review
7 Presentations
5 Philippines
1 Singapore
1 Vietnam
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
49/78
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
50/78
Tamil Nadu, India
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
51/78
Bhubaneswar, India
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
52/78
Ghorakpur, India
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
53/78
Tamil Nadu, India
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
54/78
Tamil Nadu, India
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
55/78
Tamil Nadu, India
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
56/78
Gowati Skyline
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
57/78
Singapore Skyline
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
58/78
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
59/78
Carabao
1 horsepower
Bihar, India
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
60/78
Tamil Nadu, India
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
61/78
Tamil Nadu, India
Tamil Nadu, India
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
62/78
Bihar, India
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
63/78
Bihar, India
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
64/78
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
65/78
Bhubaneswar, India
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
66/78
Ganesh
Kumaran Anurag
PrasunRandom kid
Raman
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
67/78
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
68/78
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
69/78
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
70/78
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
71/78
Thailand
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
72/78
Thailand
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
73/78
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
74/78
WHAT NOW?
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
75/78
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
76/78
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
77/78
-
7/31/2019 Guidance and Technology: An Assessment of Project Intervention and Promoted Technologies
78/78
Maraming Salamat Po!!