Dataset Information

Gender-based Decision Making in Marketing Channel Choice - Evidence of Maize Supply Chains in Southern Ethiopia.

ABSTRACT: We examine factors affecting the choice of marketing channels for maize among male, female, and joint decision-making farm households using data from households in Dawuro zone, southern Ethiopia. Econometric results suggest that female and joint decision-makers are more likely to sell maize to consumers or retailers in the main local market where the maize price is higher than to wholesale merchants directly from the farm. Individual decision-makers (male or female) who grow improved maize varieties are more likely to sell to wholesalers directly from the farm. This may be an indication of the effectiveness of joint decisions over individual decisions related to the market price. We also found that improved maize varieties distributed to farmers in the study area are of poor quality and that there is a lack of modern storage facilities so that farmers have to sell immediately after harvest during the lower price season. Thus, there is a need for policies promoting the distribution of high-quality maize seeds and encouraging investments in the establishment of modern maize storage facilities in the study area.

Supplementary information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10745-021-00252-x.

SUBMITTER: Gebre GG

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8549917 | biostudies-literature | 2021

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Gender-based Decision Making in Marketing Channel Choice - Evidence of Maize Supply Chains in Southern Ethiopia.

Gebre Girma Gezimu GG Isoda Hiroshi H Amekawa Yuichiro Y Rahut Dil Bahadur DB Nomura Hisako H Watanabe Takaaki T

Human ecology: an interdisciplinary journal 20210903 4

We examine factors affecting the choice of marketing channels for maize among male, female, and joint decision-making farm households using data from households in Dawuro zone, southern Ethiopia. Econometric results suggest that female and joint decision-makers are more likely to sell maize to consumers or retailers in the main local market where the maize price is higher than to wholesale merchants directly from the farm. Individual decision-makers (male or female) who grow improved maize varie ...[more]

PMID: 34720333

Similar Datasets

Project description:The United States has experienced prolonged severe shortages of vital medications over the past two decades. The causes underlying the severity and prolongation of these shortages are complex, in part due to the complexity of the underlying supply chain networks, which involve supplier-buyer interactions across multiple entities with competitive and cooperative goals. This leads to interesting challenges in maintaining consistent interactions and trust among the entities. Furthermore, disruptions in supply chains influence trust by inducing over-reactive behaviors across the network, thereby impacting the ability to consistently meet the resulting fluctuating demand. To explore these issues, we model a pharmaceutical supply chain with boundedly rational artificial decision makers capable of reasoning about the motivations and behaviors of others. We use multiagent simulations where each agent represents a key decision maker in a pharmaceutical supply chain. The agents possess a Theory-of-Mind capability to reason about the beliefs, and past and future behaviors of other agents, which allows them to assess other agents' trustworthiness. Further, each agent has beliefs about others' perceptions of its own trustworthiness that, in turn, impact its behavior. Our experiments reveal several counter-intuitive results showing how small, local disruptions can have cascading global consequences that persist over time. For example, a buyer, to protect itself from disruptions, may dynamically shift to ordering from suppliers with a higher perceived trustworthiness, while the supplier may prefer buyers with more stable ordering behavior. This asymmetry can put the trust-sensitive buyer at a disadvantage during shortages. Further, we demonstrate how the timing and scale of disruptions interact with a buyer's sensitivity to trustworthiness. This interaction can engender different behaviors and impact the overall supply chain performance, either prolonging and exacerbating even small local disruptions, or mitigating a disruption's effects. Additionally, we discuss the implications of these results for supply chain operations.

Project description:BackgroundVaccine hesitancy is a significant threat to global health. A key part of addressing hesitancy is to ensure that public health messaging prioritises information that is considered important to the public. This study aimed to examine how different vaccine characteristics affect public preferences for vaccines in New Zealand, what trade-offs they are willing to make between different vaccine characteristics, and how their preferences are affected by their vaccine-related conspiracy beliefs and COVID-19 vaccination status.MethodsAn online discrete choice experiment (DCE) was designed to elicit individual preferences about vaccines using the 1000minds platform. Members of the general population of New Zealand aged ≥ 18 years were invited to complete the DCE. Participants were asked to indicate their preference between two options showing different combinations of vaccine characteristics. Data on sociodemographic characteristics were collected. Beliefs were measured using the vaccine conspiracy beliefs scale (VCBS) with scores ≥ 19 indicating strong vaccine-related conspiracy beliefs. The DCE was analysed using the PAPRIKA method (Potentially All Pairwise RanKings of all possible Alternatives) and preferences compared between respondents with high versus low VCBS scores and vaccinated versus unvaccinated respondents for COVID-19.ResultsA total of 611 respondents from 15 regions completed the DCE. Mean (SD) age was 45.9 (14.7) years with most having had 2 or more doses of the coronavirus vaccine (86%). Mean (SD) VCBS score was 18.5 (12.4) indicating moderate vaccine-related conspiracy beliefs. Risk of severe adverse effects was the most highly valued vaccine characteristic, followed by vaccine effectiveness and duration of protection. Vaccine origin and route of administration were ranked least important. Respondents scoring high on the VCBS placed less value on the effectiveness of vaccines but greater value on development time and total number of doses (p < 0.001). COVID-19 unvaccinated respondents ranked development time and total number of doses more highly than those vaccinated respondents (p < 0.001).ConclusionsRisk of severe adverse effects, vaccine effectiveness and duration of protection were rated by the New Zealand public as the top three most important vaccine characteristics. This information is important for informing public health messaging to promote vaccine uptake and inform vaccine decision-making.

Project description:BackgroundPatients with kidney failure experience a complex decision on dialysis modality performed either at home or in hospital. The options have different levels of impact on their physical and psychological condition and social life. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the implementation of an intervention designed to achieve shared decision-making for dialysis choice. Specific objectives were: 1) to measure decision quality as indicated by patients' knowledge, readiness and achieved preferences; and 2) to determine if patients experienced shared decision-making.MethodA mixed methods descriptive study was conducted using both questionnaires and semi-structured interviews. Eligible participants were adults with kidney failure considering dialysis modality. The intervention, based on the Three-Talk model, consisted of a patient decision aid and decision coaching meetings provided by trained dialysis coordinators. The intervention was delivered to 349 patients as part of their clinical pathway of care. After the intervention, 148 participants completed the Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire and the Decision Quality Measurement, and 29 participants were interviewed. Concordance between knowledge, decision and preference was calculated to measure decision quality. Interview transcripts were analysed qualitatively.ResultsThe participants obtained a mean score for shared decision-making of 86 out of 100. There was no significant difference between those choosing home- or hospital-based treatment (97 versus 83; p = 0.627). The participants obtained a knowledge score of 82% and a readiness score of 86%. Those choosing home-based treatment had higher knowledge score than those choosing hospital-based treatment (84% versus 75%; p = 0.006) but no significant difference on the readiness score (87% versus 84%; p = 0.908). Considering the chosen option and the knowledge score, 83% of the participants achieved a high-quality decision. No significant difference was found for decision quality between those choosing home- or hospital-based treatment (83% versus 83%; p = 0.935). Interview data informed the interpretation of these results.ConclusionsAlthough there was no control group, over 80% of participants exposed to the intervention and responded to the surveys experienced shared decision-making and reached a high-quality decision. Both participants who chose home- and hospital-based treatment experienced the intervention as shared decision-making and made a high-quality decision. Qualitative findings supported the quantitative results.Trial registrationThe full trial protocol is available at ClinicalTrials. Gov ( NCT03868800 ). The study has been registered retrospectively.

Dataset Information

Gender-based Decision Making in Marketing Channel Choice - Evidence of Maize Supply Chains in Southern Ethiopia.

Supplementary information

Publications

Gender-based Decision Making in Marketing Channel Choice - Evidence of Maize Supply Chains in Southern Ethiopia.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets