Off-Farm Participation, Agricultural Production and Farmers’ Welfare in Tanzania and Uganda

Kinuthia, Bethuel Kinyanjui; Araar, Abdelkrim; Lalampaa, Laura Nelima; Maende, Stephene; Mariera, Faith

doi:10.2139/ssrn.3344558

Cited by 8 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This study suggested that there are trade‐offs between nonfarm activities and farm activities. Confirming this finding, Kinuthia, Araar, Lalampaa, Maende, and Mariera (2019) show that off‐farm participation has negatively affected agricultural production.…”

Section: Theoretical Perspectives and Empirical Reviewsmentioning

confidence: 67%

Complementarity and substitutability between farm and nonfarm activities: Evidence from agricultural households in Tanzania

Aikaeli

Chegere

Rand

2022

Review Development Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Increasing evidence shows that farm households in developing countries maintain a portfolio of income‐generating activities. Concerns have been raised that household income diversification to include nonfarm activities will stifle farm works, and thus reduce agricultural productivity. On the contrary, some evidence of complementarity between the farm and nonfarm activities in rural areas has been found. This paper uses data from the fourth and the fifth waves of Tanzania's National Panel Surveys to examine whether there exists complementarity or substitutability between farm and nonfarm activities in rural Tanzania. The findings show that participation in off‐farm work and nonfarm business activities has no clear relationship to the adoption and use of improved agricultural practices, namely, irrigation, fertilizers, pesticides, and herbicides. Participation in off‐farm work and nonfarm business activities does not also seem to directly influence agricultural investments, production, and productivity nor overall household income. These results suggest that the complementary and substitution effects of nonfarm activities offset each other in Tanzania, implying that proper policies are required to unleash the potential impact of nonfarm activities on agriculture.

show abstract

Section: Theoretical Perspectives and Empirical Reviewsmentioning

confidence: 67%

Complementarity and substitutability between farm and nonfarm activities: Evidence from agricultural households in Tanzania

Aikaeli

Chegere

Rand

2022

Review Development Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A number of studies (Anyanwu, 2010;Awoyemi, 2011;Abbott et al, 2012;Scharf and Rahut, 2014;Katsushi et al, 2015;Oladimeji et al, 2015;Adjognon et al, 2017;Lambon-Quayefio, 2017;Nagler and Naude, 2017;Iqgal et al, 2018;Megbowon and Mushunje, 2018;Kinuthia et al, 2019) have been carried out on non-farm enterprises as National livelihood strategy but none assessed their effect on rural farming households in Nigeria using panel data with the use of a counterfactual framework. This study evaluates the impact of non-farm enterprises on the poverty of rural farming households in Nigeria.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact assessment of non-farm enterprises on poverty status of rural farming households in Nigeria

Kolawole

2021

J. Agribus. Rural Dev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study evaluates the impact of non-farm enterprises on the poverty status of rural farming households in Nigeria. The data were obtained from General Household Survey fielded by the National Bureau of Statistics in 2010/2011 and 2015/2016. However, only 1,619 matched observations were used for analyses, using Propensity Score Matching, Double Difference, Foster-Greer-Thorbecke poverty measures and Poverty Equivalent Growth Rates (PEGRs). The results show that 53.3% of participants lived below the poverty line (poor) in 2011, while in 2016, this proportion declined to 31.94%. The poverty incidence of female participants (0.5504) decreased by 53.68% while that of male participants (0.4112) decreased by 4.81%. If female participants had not participated in non-farm enterprises, their poverty would have been reduced by only 9.7% but due to participation, it was reduced by 53.68%. The Poverty Equivalent Growth Rates are higher for all the three FGT measures than the actual growth rates for all participants, males and females with females showing higher poverty reduction; which means that growth was propoor, although the poverty of the poor decreased more than that of the core poor. Also, after five years there is a decline in poverty incidences of participants across the six geopolitical zones and the decline was mostly felt in the North East (NE) followed by North Central (NC) while the least percentage decline was seen in North West (NW). Since participation in non-farm activities had a significant impact on the poverty of participants, the promotion of non-farm enterprises among poor farmers should be encouraged.

show abstract

“…For instance, a limited land ownership system hinders socioeconomic investment which has contributed to slow economic growth in most developing countries (Gebreeyosus et al, 2020). Therefore, a proper land ownership system among farmers in Tanzania is vital due to its role on contributing development particularly in rural areas (Kinuthia et al, 2019). It has been documented that farmers with proper land ownership systems tend to invest more in their lands leading to sustainable agricultural productivity (Sipangule, 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Econometric Analysis of Maize Farmer’s Choice of Land Ownership Systems: Evidence Using Panel Data from Tanzania

Lasway

Selejio

2021

Afr. Rev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper determines the socioeconomic and physical characteristics that influence maize farmer’s choice of land ownership systems in Tanzania, i.e., owned, sharecropped, and rented title land. The paper uses the Tanzania National Panel Survey (TZNPS) data basing on 2,073 observations comprising of a sample size of 691 households in three consecutive waves 2008/2009, 2010/2011, and 2012/2013. Using a t-test for mean comparison, the paper found that there is a significant difference between male and female-headed households across socioeconomic and physical factors determining the choice of land ownership systems among maize smallholder farmers. Moreover, the paper findings revealed that 90 percent, 7 percent, and 3 percent of the sampled maize smallholder farmers chose to farm under-owned, shared, and rented title land system respectively. Furthermore, the econometric analysis which is grounded from the multinomial logit regression model showed that accessibility, farm size, quantity harvested, accessibility of extension services, gender, household size, and age are all pertinent in influencing the smallholder maize farmer’s choice of land ownership. The paper recommends that these characteristics of the smallholder maize producers should be critically considered when formulating any land and agricultural policies to enhance proper decision making by smallholder farmers on the choice of land ownership system that may led to sustainable agricultural production, productivity, and food security in developing countries particularly in Tanzania.

show abstract

Off-Farm Participation, Agricultural Production and Farmers’ Welfare in Tanzania and Uganda

Cited by 8 publications

References 41 publications

Complementarity and substitutability between farm and nonfarm activities: Evidence from agricultural households in Tanzania

Complementarity and substitutability between farm and nonfarm activities: Evidence from agricultural households in Tanzania

Impact assessment of non-farm enterprises on poverty status of rural farming households in Nigeria

An Econometric Analysis of Maize Farmer’s Choice of Land Ownership Systems: Evidence Using Panel Data from Tanzania

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About