Impacts of improved agricultural technology adoption on welfare in Africa: A meta-analysis

被引:3
|
作者
Habtewold, Tsegaye Mulugeta [1 ]
Heshmati, Almas [2 ]
机构
[1] Adama Sci & Technol Univ, Sch Humanities & Social Sci, Dept Technol & Innovat Management, Adama, Ethiopia
[2] Jonkoping Univ, Jonkoping Int Business Sch, Room B5017, SE-55111 Jonkoping, Sweden
关键词
Technology adoption; Meta-analysis; Agriculture; Food security; Poverty; Africa; IMPROVED MAIZE VARIETIES; HOUSEHOLD FOOD SECURITY; SCORE MATCHING ANALYSIS; META-REGRESSION; TECHNICAL EFFICIENCY; PUBLICATION BIAS; POVERTY REDUCTION; ECONOMIC-IMPACTS; MINIMUM-WAGE; INCOME;
D O I
10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e17463
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
A large body of researches have widely examined the impact of adopting improved agricultural practices and technologies on general welfare of smallholder farmers. The results of deep liter-ature review show that varies agricultural technologies have significant impacts on different welfare measures identified in the primary studies. However, the estimated effects of technology adoption differ among studies. The current study presents a meta-analysis of empirical estimates using a sample of 52 studies that investigated the impact of improved agricultural technologies in Africa on three key sets of outcome variables: output or expenditure, food security, and poverty. The study also conducted tests for publication bias to see if researchers tend to report results in similar or different ways for the same outcome variable. The findings the study shed light on the ways of identifying potential factors explaining the differences in the effects of estimated tech-nology adoption. Results of the meta-regression analysis revealed that differences in the reported impact of technologies is explained by factors like data type, model specification, sample size, region of the study, and journal type. It was also observed that no publication bias in the studies reviewed for the effect size measures of output (expenditure) and poverty models, but in the food security model there is some evidence of publication bias. One of the core implications of the current study is that, based on the sensitivity of effect sizes to study attributes (i.e. data type, econometric methods, sample size, region of the study, and journal type), interested researchers and academicians need to pay attention to these attributes to provide more reliable estimates for policy interventions. We believe this study provides information useful to interested decision-makers in designing policy intervention measures that could encourage the adoption of improved agricultural practices and technologies in the African context. Finally, the study also highlighted future research directions.
引用
收藏
页数:16
相关论文
共 50 条