references - virginia tech · 2020-01-20 · environmental systems research institute (esri)....

REFERENCES Alston, J.M., G.W. Norton, and P. G. Pardey. Science under Scarcity: Principles and Practice for Agricultural Research Evaluation and Priority Setting. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1995. Alston, J.M., P.G. Pardey, S.Wood, and L. You. Strategic Technology Investments for LAC Agriculture: A Framework for Evaluating the Local and Spillover Effects of R&D. Washington, D.C.: IFPRI, 2000. Alston, J., G.W. Edwards, and J.W. Freebairn. “Market Distortions and Benefits from Research.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 70 (1980): 281-288. Antle, J.M. and S.M. Capalbo. Measurement and Evaluation of the Impacts of Agricultural Chemical Use: A Framework for Analysis. In Impact of Pesticides on Farmer Health and the Rice Environment. P.L. Pingali and P.A. Roger, eds. Norwell, MA, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1995. Antle, J. M., and S. M. Capalbo. Integrated Assessment of IPM Impacts: An overview, ed. S. Lynch, C. Green, and C. Kramer-LeBlanc. Washington, DC, USDA-ERS Misc. Pub No 1542 (1996): 33-39. Araji, A. A. “The Economic Impact of Investment in Integrated Pest Management.” University of Idaho Agricultural Experiment Station, January 1981. Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics (BBS). Yearbook of Agricultural Statistics of Bangladesh. Dhaka, Bangladesh, 1995-97. Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics (BBS). Statistical Yearbook of Bangladesh. Dhaka, Bangladesh, 1997. Bezuneh, M. Deaton, B., and G.W. Norton. “Food Aid Impacts in Rural Kenya.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 70 (1988): 181-191. Boutwell, J.L., and R. H. Smith. “A New Concept in Evaluating IPM Programs.” Entomological Society of America Bulletin 27 (1981): 117-118. Corbett, John D. “Classifying Maize Production Zones.” Maize Technology Development and Transfer: A GIS application for research planning in Kenya. CAB International, 1998.

97

Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI). Getting to Know ArcView GIS: Geographic Information Systems for Everyone. ESRI Press: Redlands, CA, 1999. Feder, G., R.E. Just, and D. Zilberman. “Adoption of Agricultural Innovations in Developing Countries: A Survey.” Economic Development and Cultural Change 33: 255-298. Fernandez-Cornejo, J. “The Microeconomic Impact of IPM Adoption: Theory and Application.” Agricultural and Resource Economics Review 25, no. 2(1996): 149-160. Fernandez-Cornejo, J. “Environmental and economic consequences of technology adoption: IPM in Vitaculture.” Agricultural Economics 18 (1998): 145-55. Fernandez-Cornejo, J., W. D. Beach, and W. Y. Huang. “The Adoption of Integrated Pest Management Techniques by Vegetable Growers.” Resource and Technology Division, ERS-USDA, November 1992. Fernandez-Cornejo, J., and S. Jans. “The Economic Impact of IPM Adoption for Orange Producers in California and Florida.” Acta Horticulture, no. 429 (1996): 325-335. Food and Agricultural Organization of United Nations (FAO). Agro-ecological Zones of Bangladesh. Rome: 1997. Gerland, Patrick. “Socio-economic data and GIS: datasets, databases, indicators, and data integration issues.” Workshop on Use of GIS in Agricultural Research Management. UNEP/CGIAR. Norway, June 17-21, 1996. Greene, C.R. and G.W. Cuperus. “An Economic Analysis of Soybean Integrated Pest Management.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 67, no. 3 (1985): 567-572. International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI). DREAM on CD-ROM. Washington, D.C.: 2000. Hall, D. C., and G. M. Duncan. “Econometric Evaluation of New Technology with an application to Integrated Pest Management.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 66 (1984): 624-633. Harper, J., et al. “”Factors Influencing the Adoption of Insect Management Technology.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 72 (1990): 997-1005.

98

Hassan, R.M. Maize Technology Development and Transfer: A GIS Application for Research Planning in Kenya. CAB International, New York, NY, 1998. Hayami, Y., and V.W. Ruttan. Agricultural Development. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press, 1985. Lacewell, R. D., and S. M. Masud. “Benefit Cost Analysis of Integrated Pest Management Programs.” Proceeding of Pest and Pesticide Management in the Caribbean, ed. E. G. B. Gooding. Bridgetown, Barbados, 1980. Liapis, P. S., and J. Moffitt. “Economic Analysis of Cotton Integrated Pest Management Strategies.” Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics 15 (1983): 97-102. Mack, C. B. “Application of GIS Technology for Agricultural Development.” Workshop on AEZ/GIS Database Management and Applications, BARC. Farmgate, Dhaka, Bangladesh, June 29-30, 1997. Masud, S. M., and R. D. Lacewell. “Economic Implications of Alternative Cotton IPM Strategies in the United Sates,” Department of Agricultural Economics Information Report, no. 85-5, Texas A&M, College Stat. July 1985. Masud, S. M., R. D. Lacewell, C. R. Taylor, J. H. Benedict, and L. A. Lippke, “Economic Impact of Integrated Pest Management Strategies for Cotton Production in the Coastal Bend Region of Texas.” Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics 13, no. 2(1981): 47-52. Mills, Bradford (Ed.). Agricultural Research Priority Setting: Information Investments for Improved Use of Resources. The Hague: International Service for National Agricultural Research, 1998. Bradford Mills, "Ex-Ante Research Evaluation and Regional Trade Flows". Journal of Agricultural Economics, 49(3), 1998: 391-406. Mutangadura, G. and G. Norton. “Agricultural research priority setting under multiple objectives: an example from Zimbabwe.” Agricultural Economics 20, no. 3 (1999): 277-286. Napit, K. B., et al. “Economic Impacts of Extension Integrated Pest Management Programs in Several States.” Journal of Environmental Economics 81, no. 1(1988): 251-256.

99

Norton, G.W., and J. Mullen. “Economic Evaluation of Integrated Pest Management Programs: A Literature Review.” Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, March 1994. Norton, G.W. and P.G. Pardey. Training Guide for Agricultural Research Evaluation and Priority Setting. ISNAR, The Hague: March 1994. Norton, G.W., P.G. Pardey, and J.M. Alston. “Economic Issues in Agricultural Research Priority Setting.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 74 (1992): 1089-1094. Norton, G.W. and M. Dey. Analysis of Agricultural Research Priorities in Bangladesh. No. 93-07, ISNAR, The Hague: March 1993. Norton, G. W., and J. S. Davis. “Evaluating Returns to Agricultural Research: A Review.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 63 (1981): 686-699. Norton, G. W., V. G. Ganoza, and C. Pomareda. “Potential Benefits of Agricultural Research and Extension in Peru.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 69 no. 2 (1987): 247-257. Norton, G. W., J. Mullen, and E. G. Rajotte. “A Premier on Economic Assessment of Integrated Pest Management.” Proceedings of the Third National IPM Symposium/Workshop. eds. S. Lynch, C. Greene, and C. Kramer-LeBlanc. Washington, DC, USDA-ERS Misc. Pub No. 1542, 1996. Nowak, P.J. “The Adoption of Agricultural Conservation Technologies: Economic and Diffusion Explanations.” Rural Sociology 52 (1987): 205-220. Pimentel, D. et al. “Environmental and Economic Costs of Pesticide Use.” BioScience 42, no. 10 (1992): 750-760. Pimentel, D. et al. “Environmental and Social Costs of Pesticides: a Preliminary Assessment.” Oikos 34, no. 2 (1980): 126-140. Pimentel, D. et al. “Environmental and Economic Impacts of Reducing U.S. Agricultural Pesticide Use” Handbook of Pest Management in Agriculture. D. Pimentel, and A. Hanson, eds. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 1991. Qaim, Matin. “Potential Benefits of Agricultural Biotechnology: An Example from the Mexican Potato Sector.” Review of Agricultural Economics 21, no. 2 (1999): 390-408.

100

Rajotte, E. G. et al. “The National Evaluation of Extension’s Integrated Pest Management (IPM) Programs.” Virginia Cooperative Extension Service, February 1987. Rose, R.N. “Supply Shifts and the Size of Research Benefits: Comment.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 62, no. 4 (1980): 834-837. Singh, R.B. 1990. Vegetable Production in Asia and the Pacific region. In: Status and Management of Major Vegetable Pests in the Asia-Pacific Region, pp. 1-11. RAPA Publication 1990/3. Regional Office for Asia and Pacific, FAO, Bangkok, Thailand. Swinton, S.M. and M.B. Williams. “Assessing the Economic Impacts of Integrated Pest Management: Lessons from the Past, Directions for the Future.” Integrated Pest Management Measurement Systems. American Farmland Trust, Chicago, IL, 1998. Taylor, D. and W. Miller. “The Adoption Process and Environmental Innovations: A Case Study of a Government Project.” Rural Sociology 43 (1978): 634-648. Trumble, J. T., W. G. Carson, and G. S. Kund. “Economics and Environmental Impact of a Sustainable Integrated Pest Management Program in Celery.” Journal Environmental Economics 90, no. 1 (1997): 139-146. Tweeten, L. Agricultural Policy Analysis Tools for Economic Development. Westview Press, San Francisco, 1989: 97-111. Uganda Bureau of Statistics (UBS). Agricultural Statistics of Uganda. Entebbe, 1997. Uganda Bureau of Statistics (UBS). Uganda National Household Surveys. Entebbe, 1992-97. Uganda Bureau of Statistics (UBS). Population and Housing Census. Entebbe, 1991. Uganda Bureau of Statistics (UBS). Statistical Abstract. Entebbe, 1997. Ward, C. E. “Economic Analysis of Alfalfa Integrated Pest Management Practices.” Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics 22 (1990): 109-115. Whitaker, M., E. Wennergreen, and E., C. Antholt. Agricultural Development in Bangladesh. Colorado: Westview Press, 1984.

101

World Bank. The Long Term Perspective Study of sub-Saharan Africa: Economic and Sectoral Policy Issues. Washington D.C., 1990. World Bank. Uganda Agriculture: A World Bank Country Study. Washington, D.C., 1993. World Bank. The World Development Report. Washington, D.C., 2000. Wortmann, C.S. and C. Eldu. Agro-Ecological Zones of Uganda. CIAT, Kampala: 1999. Zalom. F. G., et al. “Integrated Pest Management: Addressing the Economic and Environmental Issues of Contemporary Agriculture”, ed. F. G. Zalom, and W. E. Fry. St. Paul, APS Press, 1992: 1-12.

102

APPENDIX

103

APPENDIX A: Key to Questionnaires

1. Research Lag: The first question is aimed to elicit information on when the

research was started and after how many years was it available to the farmers. This question will help determine the research lag period when analyzing the research’s cost.

2. Expected Change: The second question is aimed to estimate what the

percentage yield or cost change is as result of the adoption of the technology. The questions should be addressed specifically to agro-production areas for the commodity in focus. Note that these production areas are not agro-ecological zones (AEZ) of the country, but they are production areas refined from the AEZ.

3. Success: The third question follows the second in trying to obtain what

would be the success rate in achieving the above yield or cost change. This question also needs to be addressed for each production areas.

4. Adoption: This is the most important question of all. A successful research

investment generally yields a sustained stream of benefits. But these benefits can not be realized if the farmers do not adopt them. Thus this question will obtain information in regard to adoption rates of each technology for each production areas. Also, it is essential to determine what the maximum adoption rate will be in profiling adoption patterns over time and space.

5. Depreciation: This question draws the questionnaires to conclusion by bring

all the questions together. At this point, information in regard to when research was initiated, disseminated, adopted, and reached its highest peak of adoption are all collected. Now, it is important to know if the technology in question does depreciate over time. If it does, we need to know how many years after its release that it begins to degenerate. Also, information is need on how long does it take for the technology to reach its total depreciation.

104

APPENDIX B: Research Questionnaires

IPM CRSP/UGANDA

QUESTIONNAIRE ON TECHNOLOGY ADOPTION PROFILE

Technology: Seed Dressing for Beans

Purpose of Questionnaire: To elicit information on changes in production and in cost due to the introduction of seed dressing and to assess factors of its adoption for economic evaluation study

Researcher Name:

Specialty Field:

Institute:

Level of Researcher:

Years of research experience:

Type of Involvement in IPM-CRSP:

Date of Interview:

105

Uganda IPM CRSP Questionnaire on Technology Adoption Profile

1. (a) When did the research to develop Seed dressing begin?

(b) When will seed dressing be available to farmers? Technology Year research began Year variety released

Seed Dressing

2. What is the expected percentage change in yield per hectare or cost per hectare

(negative or positive) if seed dressing is adopted? Yield Change (%) Cost Change (%)

Technology Most Likely Most Likely

Seed Dressing

Agro Production Zone 1




3. Success: What is the expected probability of achieving the above yield or cost

reduction? Technology Success Level (%)

Seed Dressing





106

4. (a) Fore each zone, what is the maximum percentage of the farmers expected to adopt seed dressing? (b) How many years after it is released do you expect maximum adoption will be reached?

Technology/Zone Maximum percent of

adoption

Number of Years to Max.

Adoption

Seed Dressing





5. Will seed dressing become an obsolete technology or degenerate overtime

(YES/NO)? __________ If yes, how many years after release? Number of years to total depreciation of the technology?

Technology No. of years to depreciation No. of years to complete

depreciation

Seed Dressing

107

IPM CRSP/UGANDA


Technology: Longe-1 Maize variety

Purpose of Questionnaire: To elicit information on changes in production and in cost due to the introduction of Longe-1 maize variety and to assess factors of its adoption for economic evaluation study

Researcher Name:

Specialty Field:

Institute:




Date of Interview:

108

Uganda IPM-CRSP Questionnaire on Technology Adoption Profile

1. (a) When did the research to develop Longe-1 begin?

(b) When was Longe-1 available to farmers? Technology Year research began Year variety released

Longe-1

2. What is the expected percentage change in yield per hectare or cost per hectare

(negative or positive) as the technology is being adopted? Yield Change (%) Cost Change (%)

Technology Most Likely Most Likely

Longe-1

Agro Production Zone 1 Agro Production Zone 2




reduction? Technology Success Level (%)

Longe-1

Agro Production Zone 1 Agro Production Zone 2



109

4. (a) Fore each zone, what is the maximum percentage of the farmers expected to adopt Longe-1? (b) How many years after it is released do you expect maximum adoption will be reached?

Technology Maximum percent of

Adoption

Number of Years to Max.

Adoption

Longe-1





5. Will Longe-1 become an obsolete variety or degenerate overtime (YES/NO)? ______

If yes, how many years after release? Number of years to total depreciation of the variety?

Technology No. of years to

depreciation

No. of years to complete

depreciation

Longe-1

AgroProduction Zone 1




110

IPM-CRSP/BANGLADESH


Technology: Hand Weeding for Cabbage

Purpose of Questionnaire: To elicit information on changes in production and in cost due to the introduction of Hand Weeding (at 15 & 45 DAT) and to assess factors of its adoption for economic evaluation study

Researcher Name:

Specialty Field:

Institute:




Date of Interview:

111

Bangladesh IPM-CRSP Questionnaire on Technology Adoption Profile

1. (a) When did the research to develop Hand Weeding (at 15 & 45 DAT) begin? – 1998-99

(b) When will Hand Weeding (at 15 & 45 DAT) be available to farmers? – 2000-2001 Technology Year research began Year technology developed

Hand Weeding (at 15 & 45 DAT)

2. What is the maximum expected percentage change in yield per hectare or cost per

hectare (negative or positive) compared to farmer practice if Hand Weeding (at 15 & 45 DAT) is adopted?

Technology Yield Change

(%) Most likely

Cost Change (%) Most likely







reduction? Technology Success Level

(%)






112

4. (a) For each zone, what is the maximum percentage of the farmers expected to adopt Hand Weeding (at 15 & 45 DAT)? (b) How many years after it is released do you expect maximum adoption will be reached?

Technology Maximum percent

of adoption Number of years to maximum adoption






5. Will Hand Weeding (at 15 & 45 DAT) become an obsolete technology or degenerate

overtime (YES/NO)? If yes, how many years after release? Number of years to total depreciation of the technology?


depreciation No. of years to complete depreciation


113

IPM-CRSP/BANGLADESH


Technology: Neem Leaf Powder for Brinjal Cultivation

Purpose of Questionnaire: To elicit information on changes in production and in cost due to the introduction of Neam Leaf Powder and to assess factors of its adoption for economic evaluation study

Researcher Name:

Specialty Field:

Institute:




Date of Interview:

114

Bangladesh IPM-CRSP Questionnaire on Technology Adoption Profile

1. (a) When did the research to develop Neem Leaf Powder begin?

(b) When will Neam Leaf Powder be available to farmers? Technology Year research

began Year technology developed

Neam Leaf Powder (NLP)

2. What is the maximum expected percentage change in yield per hectare or cost per

hectare (negative or positive) if Neam Leaf Powder is adopted? Technology Yield Change

(%) Most likely

Cost Change (%) Most likely







reduction? Technology Success Level

(%)






115

4. (a) For each zone, what is the maximum percentage of the farmers expected to adopt Neam Leaf Powder? (b) How many years after it is released do you expect maximum adoption will be reached?

Technology Maximum percent

of adoption Number of years to maximum adoption






5. Will Neam Leaf Powder (NLP) become an obsolete technology or degenerate

overtime (YES/NO)? If yes, how many years after release? Number of years to total depreciation of the variety?


Depreciation No. of years to complete depreciation


116

APPENDIX C: Map of Bangladesh & Uganda Figure C1: Map of Bangladesh

117

Figure C2: Map of Uganda

118

Bangladesh Country Profile 1995 1998 1999

People Population, total 119.8

million125.6

million 127.7

million

Population density (people per sq km) 920.1 .. ..

Population growth (annual %) 1.6 1.6 1.6

Life expectancy at birth, total (years) .. 58.5 ..

Fertility rate, total (births per woman) .. 3.1 ..

Mortality rate, infant (per 1,000 live births) .. 72.8 ..

Mortality rate, under-5 (per 1,000 live births) .. 96.0 ..

Urban population (% of total) 21.8 23.4 24.0

Population density, rural (people per sq km) 1,196.5 .. ..

Illiteracy rate, adult male (% of males 15+) 50.7 48.9 48.3

Illiteracy rate, adult female (% of females 15+) 73.5 71.4 70.7

Environment Surface area (sq km) 144.0

thousand.. ..

Forest area (sq. km) 10,100.0 .. ..

Annual deforestation (% of change) 0.8 .. ..

CO2 emissions, industrial (metric tons per capita) 0.2 .. ..

Commercial energy use (kg of oil equivalent per capita) 198.8 .. ..

Economy GDP at market prices (current US$) 37.6 billion 42.7 billion 45.8 billion

GDP growth (annual %) 5.5 5.1 4.3

GNP, Atlas method (current US$) 39.2 billion 45.1 billion 47.0 billion

GNP per capita, Atlas method (current US$) 330.0 360.0 370.0

Inflation, GDP deflator (annual %) .. .. ..

Agriculture, value added (% of GDP) 24.8 22.2 21.1

Industry, value added (% of GDP) 26.2 27.9 26.8

Services, etc., value added (% of GDP) 49.0 49.9 52.1

Exports of goods and services (% of GDP) 11.0 13.8 13.6

Imports of goods and services (% of GDP) 17.1 18.9 19.4

Gross domestic investment (% of GDP) 20.0 22.2 20.3

Money and quasi money growth (annual %) 12.2 11.4 15.5

Infrastructure Telephone mainlines (per 1,000 people) 2.4 3.0 ..

Telephone average cost of local call (US$ per three minutes) 0.0 0.0 ..

Roads, paved (%) 7.9 .. ..

Aircraft departures 12,600.0 11,900.0 ..

Trade and finance Trade (% of GDP, PPP) 6.5 7.0 ..

Foreign direct investment, net inflows in reporting country (WDI, current US$) 2.0 million

308.0 million ..

Present value of debt (current US$) .. 10.1 billion ..

Total debt service (TDS, current US$) 811.7 million

682.7 million ..

Short-term debt outstanding (DOD, current US$) 202.6 million

149.9 million ..

Aid per capita (current US$) 10.7 10.0 ..

Source: World Development Indicators database, July 2000

APPENDIX D: Country Profiles

119

Uganda Country Profile 1995 1998 1999

People Population, total 19.2

million20.9

million 21.5 million

Population density (people per sq km) 96.0 .. ..

Population growth (annual %) 3.0 2.8 2.7

Life expectancy at birth, total (years) .. 41.8 ..

Fertility rate, total (births per woman) .. 6.5 ..

Mortality rate, infant (per 1,000 live births) .. 100.7 ..

Mortality rate, under-5 (per 1,000 live births) .. 170.0 ..

Urban population (% of total) 12.5 13.5 13.9

Population density, rural (people per sq km) 331.5 .. ..

Illiteracy rate, adult male (% of males 15+) 26.3 23.9 23.2

Illiteracy rate, adult female (% of females 15+) 49.8 45.8 44.5

Environment Surface area (sq km) 241.0

thousand.. ..

Forest area (sq. km) 61,040.0 .. ..

Annual deforestation (% of change) 0.9 .. ..

CO2 emissions, industrial (metric tons per capita) 0.1 .. ..

Economy GDP at market prices (current US$) 5.8 billion 6.8 billion 6.3 billion

GDP growth (annual %) 11.5 5.6 7.8

GNP, Atlas method (current US$) 4.7 billion 6.6 billion 6.8 billion

GNP per capita, Atlas method (current US$) 250.0 310.0 320.0

Inflation, GDP deflator (annual %) .. .. ..

Agriculture, value added (% of GDP) 49.4 44.6 44.2

Industry, value added (% of GDP) 14.3 17.6 17.9

Services, etc., value added (% of GDP) 36.3 37.8 37.9

Exports of goods and services (% of GDP) 11.8 10.3 11.4

Imports of goods and services (% of GDP) 20.8 19.7 23.1

Gross domestic investment (% of GDP) 16.2 15.1 17.2

Money and quasi money growth (annual %) 13.9 22.9 14.1

Infrastructure Telephone mainlines (per 1,000 people) 2.0 2.8 ..

Telephone average cost of local call (US$ per three minutes) 0.2 0.2 ..

Internet hosts (per 10,000 people) 0.0 0.0 0.1

Aircraft departures 900.0 900.0 ..

Trade and finance Trade (% of GDP, PPP) 7.8 7.1 ..

Net barter terms of trade (1995=100) 100.0 .. ..

Foreign direct investment, net inflows in reporting country (WDI, current US$)

121.0 million

200.0 million ..

Present value of debt (current US$) .. 2.4 billion ..

Total debt service (TDS, current US$) 136.7 million

159.5 million ..

Short-term debt outstanding (DOD, current US$) 92.9 million

135.1 million ..

Source: World Development Indicators database, July 2000

120

VITA Thomas Debass was born the 19th of December 1975. He attended and graduated from R.E. Lee High School in Springfield, Virginia in 1993. Thomas entered Virginia Tech in 1993 and received a B.A. in Economics in 1997. During the summer of 1997, he undertook an internship with the African Development Bank Group in Abidjan, Cote d’Ivoire. His experience with the bank group led him to realize his keen interest in issues pertaining to international development. In January 1998 he entered Graduate school in the Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics at Virginia Tech. Working on a research assistantship under the direction of George Norton and Daniel Taylor, he received his Master of Science degree in Agricultural & Applied Economics in September 2001.

121

references - virginia tech · 2020-01-20 · environmental systems research institute (esri)....

Documents