Dataset Information

Smallholder farmers and contract farming in developing countries.

ABSTRACT: Poverty is prevalent in the small-farm sector of many developing countries. A large literature suggests that contract farming-a preharvest agreement between farmers and buyers-can facilitate smallholder market participation, improve household welfare, and promote rural development. These findings have influenced the development policy debate, but the external validity of the extant evidence is limited. Available studies typically focus on a single contract scheme or on a small geographical area in one country. We generate evidence that is generalizable beyond a particular contract scheme, crop, or country, using nationally representative survey data from 6 countries. We focus on the implications of contract farming for household income and labor demand, finding that contract farmers obtain higher incomes than their counterparts without contracts only in some countries. Contract farmers in most countries exhibit increased demand for hired labor, which suggests that contract farming stimulates employment, yet we do not find evidence of spillover effects at the community level. Our results challenge the notion that contract farming unambiguously improves welfare. We discuss why our results may diverge from previous findings and propose research designs that yield greater internal and external validity. Implications for policy and research are relevant beyond contract farming.

SUBMITTER: Meemken EM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6955373 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Smallholder farmers and contract farming in developing countries.

Meemken Eva-Marie EM Bellemare Marc F MF

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 20191213 1

Poverty is prevalent in the small-farm sector of many developing countries. A large literature suggests that contract farming-a preharvest agreement between farmers and buyers-can facilitate smallholder market participation, improve household welfare, and promote rural development. These findings have influenced the development policy debate, but the external validity of the extant evidence is limited. Available studies typically focus on a single contract scheme or on a small geographical area ...[more]

PMID: 31836695

Similar Datasets

Project description:ContextThe COVID-19 pandemic caused unprecedented global disruption and continues to wreak havoc. Dire predictions were made about the risks to smallholder farmers in lower- and middle- income, but hard data have been lacking. We present the results from 9201 interviews with smallholder farmers from seven countries.ObjectiveThe objectives are to describe: i) how farmers perceive the key effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and containment measures on livelihoods and food security; ii) the effects on agricultural activities; iii) the coping strategies households deployed.MethodsHousehold surveys were conducted as part of ongoing monitoring programs during the latter half of 2020. Sites in seven countries were covered: Burundi; Kenya; Rwanda; Tanzania; Uganda; Zambia; and Vietnam. Findings are representative of smallholder farmers across multiple districts per country.Results and conclusionsThe effects of the COVID-19 containment measures were widespread and often perceived to be severe. Food purchase, off-farm income, sale of farm produce, and access to crop inputs were all affected. In locations under more stringent restrictions during the time of the survey, up to 80% of households had to reduce food consumption and/or variety. Almost all households with off-farm incomes reported reductions, by half on average. A half to three-quarters of households (depending on the location) with income from farm sales reported losses compared to the pre-pandemic situation. In locations with more relaxed containment measures in place during the time of the survey, less frequent and less severe economic and food security outcomes were perceived by the respondent, with around 20% of households reporting negative outcomes. Mobility restrictions, reduced market access, crashes in sale price for agricultural goods, and soaring prices for food purchase were key factors. Sale prices generally dropped for all agricultural products in any given location, and affected not only high-value perishable products, but also staple crops such as maize and cassava. Depending on the location, between 30% and 90% of the households applied coping strategies in response to the pandemic during 2020. There was an almost complete absence of official aid amongst households interviewed.SignificanceOur results raise the thorny issue of how best to balance containment of disease against the wellbeing of the vulnerable rural population in lower- and middle-income countries. There is a risk that the buffering capacity of rural people will become exhausted. Possible policy measures to limit negative outcomes include i) tiered mobility restrictions with travel allowed for economic reasons; ii) short-term price guarantee schemes to stabilise the food system; iii) direct aid; iv) the timely re-installation of distribution channels for agricultural inputs.

Project description:In Tajikistan, owning beef cattle is an important survival mechanism for smallholder farmers to alleviate poverty. Therefore, beef cattle farming enterprises should indeed strive to maximize profit to excel and flourish in a free economy. Nevertheless, smallholder beef cattle farmers are known for making little profit. Thus, this study was set to evaluate the profitability of beef cattle farming and its determinants to enhance profit maximization among smallholder beef cattle farmers in the Baljovan District of Khatlon region, Tajikistan. A total of 388 farming households were chosen at random and purposive for the study. The cross-sectional data collected using questionnaires was analyzed by using descriptive, gross margin (GM), and ordinary least squares (OLS) regression models. Based on the descriptive analyses, the mean age of beef cattle farmers was 52.73 years, with a household size of 7.07 members. The beef cattle farmers had an average of 18.23 cattle herd size with 8.54 years of farming experience. The average land area possessed by farmers was 10.59 hectares. Among farmers, men (98.2%) dominated beef cattle farming activities. Around 83.8% of farmers had a college grade (higher literacy). Besides, around 89.4% of farmers had access to farm credits. However, only 71.4% of farmers used farm credit points to produce beef cattle. Most of the farmers (89.7%) had access to accurate market information. Such market information enabled 75.8% of farmers to sell their beef cattle to open market (profitable) outlets rather than middlemen. About 89.4% had access to veterinary services. Additionally, about 82.7% of farmers acknowledged the availability of pasture for grazing, which motivated 87.6% of farmers to be involved in selling contracts. Furthermore, economic investigation results revealed that on average, farmers had a gross margin (GM-profit) of 353.77 US$ per cattle, with feed costs (58.6%) and medications costs (26.1%) accounting for the largest share of total variable costs. Meanwhile, the profitability of beef cattle farming among farmers was significantly influenced by education level, family size, farming experience, pasture availability, land size owned, selling contract, feed costs, medications expenses, access to credits, and sales costs (P < 0.05). This study concluded that beef cattle production is a feasible business. However, the potential for increased profitability is significant if existing resources are efficiently coordinated and production expenses, notably feed and healthcare costs, are minimized. Thus, the government should develop additional measures for addressing concerns such as capacity building, suitable and freely available pasture as well as health management, to boost beef cattle profitability among farmers in Tajikistan.

Project description:To understand the impact of social organisation affiliation and farmers' agricultural production practices on farmer health. Organisations facilitate the acquisition and exchange of forms of social capital which can influence the adoption of practices with potential health impacts. In countries such as Ecuador, smallholder agriculture is practised by socially vulnerable populations. Agricultural production often involves the use of extremely hazardous pesticides, while practices that reduce the use of chemicals through integrated pest management (IPM) remain uncommon.Longitudinal study (2007-2010).12 Ecuadorian communities, previously part of a participatory action research study.208 small-scale farmers. Inclusion criteria were: age between 18 and 65 years, literate and resident in the community for the previous 3 years.The differential effects of the membership in social organisations (as an effect modifier), on the relationship between the implementation of IPM practices (main independent variable) and farmers' health, measured by neurocognitive performance scores (better higher value; dependent variable).Among organisational participants, the coefficient of association between the implementation of IPM practices for the category good/very good (vs no use) and neurocognitive performance, when farmers were involved in organisations, was negative and moderate (?=-0.17, SE 0.21) though not significant (p>0.1); for the category little/moderate use, the coefficient was positive (?=0.34, SE 0.19) and significant. Among those who did not participate in organisations, both little/moderate use and good/very good use of IPM practices were associated with an increase in neurocognitive performance.The effect of agricultural production practices on farmers' health, transmitted through organisations, can be differentiated. Organisations as structures of social capital seem to be functional in the social reproduction process of the communities studied. Results highlight the need to redirect the analysis of social capital to a more integrated study of social determination of health.

Project description:Edible insects are increasingly being considered as sustainable alternatives to fish and soybean meals in animal feed because of their high nutritional quality and environmental benefits. However, successful introduction of a new product to the market depends on the target user's acceptance. Thus, evaluating the potential demand of insect-based feeds would provide relevant information for policy development. The present study assessed farmers' knowledge on edible insects as feed, their acceptance of integrating insect meals in animal feeds and willingness to pay (WTP) for insect-based feed (IBF) using a contingent valuation method. A household survey was conducted among 957 randomly selected farmers including: 409 poultry, 241 fish and 307 pig farmers in four counties in Kenya. Results of the study reveal that over 70 and 80% of poultry and fish farmers, respectively, are aware that insects can be used as a feed ingredient. In addition, over 60 and 75% of poultry and fish farmers, respectively, consider insects as a good component of feed. Poultry, pig and fish farmers interviewed accepted and showed willingness to pay for IBF. Regression analysis indicated that age, gender, education, marital status, distance to feed trader, awareness of insects as feed, attitude towards insects, acceptance of insect species, availability of agricultural inputs, use of commercial feeds, availability of training and market information had a significant influence on the WTP for IBF. Therefore, increased extension services to educate famers on the nutritional benefits of insect meals in animal feeds and existing market opportunities are expected to improve farmers' attitude towards utilization and consequently enhance WTP for IBF, which in return would significantly reduce the existing pressure on conventional fishmeal feed resources. Our findings provide the first insights into the market opportunities of including insect meals in the animal feed value chain in Kenya.

Dataset Information

Smallholder farmers and contract farming in developing countries.

Publications

Smallholder farmers and contract farming in developing countries.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets