Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T22:39:35.523Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Sustaining the beneficial effects of maize production in Nigeria: Does adoption of short season maize varieties matter?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 January 2019

Oyakhilomen Oyinbo Open the ORCID record for Oyakhilomen Oyinbo [Opens in a new window] ,
Joseph James Mbavai ,
Mohammad Bello Shitu ,
Alpha Yaya Kamara ,
Tahirou Abdoulaye  and
Omadachi Ogbodo Ugbabe
Oyakhilomen Oyinbo*
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nigeria
Joseph James Mbavai
Affiliation:
Department of Adult Education and Community Services, Bayero University Kano, Nigeria
Mohammad Bello Shitu
Affiliation:
Department of Adult Education and Community Services, Bayero University Kano, Nigeria
Alpha Yaya Kamara
Affiliation:
International Institute of Tropical Agriculture, Ibadan, Nigeria
Tahirou Abdoulaye
Affiliation:
International Institute of Tropical Agriculture, Ibadan, Nigeria
Omadachi Ogbodo Ugbabe
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nigeria
*
Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In order to ensure sustainability of maize production in short-season environments of Nigeria, the Sudan savanna taskforce of Kano–Katsina–Maradi (KKM) Pilot Learning Site promoted short-season maize varieties in 2008 via Innovation Platforms (IPs). In the light of the promoted varieties, we evaluated the adoption and net benefits (productivity and income) of the maize varieties. We used cross-sectional household data elicited from 600 sampled households, double-hurdle model and propensity score matching. There was a remarkable increase in the adoption of short-season maize varieties in 2014 compared to what was obtained in a baseline conducted in 2008. Our empirical findings revealed that the adoption of the short-season maize varieties promoted through the IPs had significant productivity and income increasing effects. This implies that policy interventions to ensure sustainable maize intensification in the face of environmental limitations, such as early and late season drought, should intensify the promotion of short-season varieties in Sudan savannas. This will require well-concerted agricultural extension that can leverage IPs in view of its potentials.

Keywords

AdoptionMaizeImpact
Type
Research Article
Information
Experimental Agriculture , Volume 55 , Issue 6 , December 2019 , pp. 885 - 897
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abdoulaye, T., Wossen, T. and Awotide, B. (2018). Impacts of improved maize varieties in Nigeria: Ex-post assessment of productivity and welfare outcomes. Food Security 10, 369–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adesina, A.A. and Zinnah, M.M. (1993). Technology characteristics, farmers’ perceptions and adoption decisions: A Tobit model application in Sierra Leone. Agricultural Economics 9, 297–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alene, A.D. and Manyong, V.M. (2006). Endogenous technology adoption and household food security: The case of improved cowpea varieties in northern Nigeria. Quarterly Journal of International Agriculture 45, 208–226.Google Scholar
Ali, A. and Abdulai, A. (2010). The adoption of genetically modified cotton and poverty reduction in Pakistan. Journal of Agricultural Economics 6, 175–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Asfaw, S., Shiferaw, B., Simtowe, F. and Haile, M.G. (2011). Agricultural technology adoption, seed access constraints and commercialization in Ethiopia. Journal of Development and Agricultural Economics 3, 436–447.Google Scholar
Ayanwale, A., Abdoulaye, T., Ayedun, B. and Akinola, A. (2011). Baseline Report of the Sudan Savannah Zone of the Kano-Katsina-Maradi (KKM) Project Learning Site (PLS) of the Sub-Saharan Africa Challenge Programme (SSA CP). Ibadan: International Institute of Tropical Agriculture.Google Scholar
Awotide, B.A., Abdoulaye, T., Alene, A. and Manyong, V.M. (2014). Assessing extent and determinants of adoption of improved cassava varieties in south-west Nigeria. Journal of Development and Agricultural Economics 6(9), 376–389.Google Scholar
Badu-Apraku, B., Yallou, C.G. and Oyekunle, M. (2013). Genetic gains from selection for high grain yield and Striga resistance in early maturing maize cultivars of three breeding periods under Striga-infested and Striga-free environments. Field Crops Research 147, 54–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cragg, J.G. (1971). Some statistical models for limited dependent variables with application to the demand for durable goods. Econometrica 39, 829–844.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Croppenstedt, A., Demeke, M. and Meschi, M.M. (2003). Technology adoption in the presence of constraints: The case of fertilizer demand in Ethiopia. Review of Development Economics 7, 58–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hassen, E., Emana, B., Kassa, B. and Haji, J. (2012). Determinants of chemical fertilizer adoption in north eastern highlands of Ethiopia: The double hurdle approach. Journal of Research in Economics and International Finance 1(2), 39–49.Google Scholar
Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) (2018). FAOSTAT Database. Available at http://faostat3.fao.org/home/E.Google Scholar
Ichino, A., Mealli, F. and Nannicini, T. (2008). From temporary help jobs to permanent employment: What can we learn from matching estimators and their sensitivity?. Journal of Applied Econometrics 23, 305–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kamara, A., Ewansiha, S.U. and Menkir, A. (2014). Assessment of nitrogen uptake and utilization in drought tolerant and Striga resistant tropical maize varieties. Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science 60, 195–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kamara, A.Y., Ekeleme, F., Menkir, A., Chikoye, D. and Omoigui, L.O. (2009). Influence of nitrogen fertilization on the performance of early and late-maturing maize cultivars under natural infestation with Striga hermonthica. Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science 55, 125–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Katengeza, S.P., Mangisoni, J.H., Kassie, G.T., Sutcliffe, C., Langyintuo, A., La Rovere, R. and Mwangi, W. (2012). Drivers of improved maize variety adoption in drought prone areas of Malawi. Journal of Development and Agricultural Economics 4, 393–403.Google Scholar
Khonje, M., Manda, J., Alene, A.D. and Kassie, M. (2015). Analysis of adoption and impacts of improved maize varieties in Eastern Zambia. World Development 66, 695–706.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manda, J., Alene, A.D., Gardebroek, C., Kassie, M. and Tembo, G. (2016). Adoption and impacts of sustainable agricultural practices on maize yields and incomes: Evidence from Rural Zambia. Journal of Agricultural Economics 66, 130–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mignouna, D.B., Manyong, V.M., Mutabazi, K.D.S. and Senkondo, E.M. (2011). Determinants of adopting imazapyr-resistant maize for Striga control in Western Kenya: A double-hurdle approach. Journal of Development and Agricultural Economics 3, 572–580.Google Scholar
Ouma, J., Bett, E. and Mbataru, P. (2014). Drivers of adoption of improved Maize varieties in moist transitional zone of Eastern Kenya. Journal of Economics and Sustainable Development 5, 147–156.Google Scholar
Pamuk, H., Bulte, E. and Adekunle, A. (2014). Do decentralized innovation systems promote agricultural technology adoption? Experimental evidence from Africa. Food Policy 44, 227–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pamuk, H., Bulte, E., Adekunle, A. and Diagne, A. (2015). Decentralized innovation systems and poverty reduction: Experimental evidence from Central Africa. European Review of Agricultural Economics 42(1), 1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenbaum, P.R. and Rubin, D.B. (1983). The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika 70, 41–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanyang, S., Taonda, S.J.-B., Kuiseu, J., Coulibaly, N.T. and Konaté, L. (2016). A paradigm shift in African agricultural research for development: The role of innovation platforms. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability 14(2), 187–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schut, M., Cadilhon, J., Misiko, M., and Dror, I. (2018). Do mature innovation platforms make a difference in agricultural research for development? A meta-analysis of case studies. Experimental Agriculture 54(1), 96–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schut, M., Kamanda, J., Gramzow, A., Dubois, T., Stoian, D., Andersson, J.A., Dror, I., Sartas, M., Mur, R., Kassam, S., Brouwer, H., Devaux, A., Velasco, C., Flor, R.J., Gummert, M., Buizer, D., Mcdougall, C., Davis, K., Tui, S.H. and Lundy, M. (2018b). Innovation platforms in agricultural research for development: Ex-ante appraisal of the purposes and conditions under which innovation platforms can contribute to agricultural development outcomes. Experimental Agriculture, 1–22 doi: 10.1017/S0014479718000200.Google Scholar
Schut, M., Klerkx, L., Sartas, M., Lamers, D., Mc Campbell, M., Ogbonna, I., Kaushik, P., Atta-Krah, K. and Leeuwis, C. (2016). Innovation platforms: Experiences with their institutional embedding in agricultural research for development. Experimental Agriculture 52(4), 537–561.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shiferaw, B.A., Kebede, T.A. and You, L. (2008). Technology adoption under seed access constraints and the economic impacts of improved pigeon pea varieties in Tanzania. Agricultural Economics 39(3), 309–323.Google Scholar
Solomon, T., Tessema, A. and Bekele, A. (2014). Adoption of improved wheat varieties in Robe and Digelu Tijo Districts of Arsi Zone in Oromia Region, Ethiopia: A double hurdle approach. African Journal of Agricultural Research 7, 3692–3703.Google Scholar
Tesfaye, K., Gbegbelegbe, S., Cairns, J.E., Shiferaw, B., Prasanna, B.M., Sonder, K., Boote, K., Makumbi, D. and Robertson, R. (2015). Maize systems under climate change in sub-Saharan Africa: Potential impacts on production and food security. International Journal of Climate Change Strategies and Management 7, 247–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weyessa, B.G. (2014). A double-hurdle approach to modeling of improved tef technologies adoption and intensity use in case of Diga District of East Wollega Zone. Global Journal of Environmental Research 8, 41–49.Google Scholar
Wossen, T., Abdoulaye, T., Alene, A., Feleke, S., Menkir, A. and Manyong, V. (2017). Measuring the impacts of adaptation strategies to drought stress: The case of drought tolerant maize varieties. Journal of Environmental Management 203, 106–113.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Supplementary material: File

Oyinbo et al. supplementary material

Tables S1 and S2

Download Oyinbo et al. supplementary material(File)
File 29.1 KB