The structural transformation of African agriculture and rural spaces: introduction to a special section<sup>†</sup>

Barrett, Chris; Christian, Paul J.; Shiferaw, Bekele

doi:10.1111/agec.12382

Cited by 26 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 38 publications

(40 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Along with these changes, Tanzanians are shifting their work time from farming to off-farm activities; the urban population share is growing; and poverty rates have fallen. These various changes are consistent with the notion that agricultural growth plays a vital role in structural change (Johnston & Mellor, 1961;Barrett et al, 2017b;Jayne et al, 2018), strengthening the (rural) non-farm economy through backward and forward linkages, and enabling people to securely exit agriculture. This article also employs a typology that categorizes Tanzania's farm population according to the scale of farming, relative reliance on farm and non-farm activities, and degree of farm commercialization.…”

supporting

confidence: 82%

The changing face of agriculture in Tanzania: Indicators of transformation

Wineman

Jayne

Modamba³

et al. 2020

Development Policy Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

supporting

confidence: 82%

The changing face of agriculture in Tanzania: Indicators of transformation

Wineman

Jayne

Modamba³

et al. 2020

Development Policy Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Smallholder households in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) are overwhelmingly dependent on agriculture that has shown little productivity improvement until the last century. After a relatively stagnant growth of agricultural productivity over several decades [1,2], African agriculture has started showing early signs of productivity growth since early 2000 [3][4][5]. The slow agricultural growth is usually attributed to a relatively low use of improved technologies, including hybrid seeds and fertilizers [1,4].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Farmers’ Willingness to Pay for Improved Agricultural Technologies: Evidence from a Field Experiment in Tanzania

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Initiatives on the sustainable intensification of agriculture have introduced improved technologies tailored to farmers’ local conditions by trial demonstration with free provision of improved seeds and fertilizers. It is not clear, though, whether smallholder farmers would be willing to pay for these technologies, and what factors determine their informed demand. Using a contingent valuation experiment, combined with information at baseline among 400 households in Northern Tanzania, this study measured farmers’ willingness to pay (WTP) for hybrid maize seed and local inorganic fertilizer. Farmers’ WTP was estimated using a dichotomous contingent valuation with follow-up model. Results showed that the average WTP was 61% higher for hybrid maize seed, and 15% lower for inorganic fertilizer, than their respective average local market prices during the reference period, suggesting that farmers were willing to pay a premium for hybrid maize seed, while they did not seem to be interested in fertilizer purchase at current market price. Moreover, since improved access to extension services was found to positively affect farmers’ WTP, strengthening extension services could be a suitable policy intervention to increase farmers’ demand for improved technologies. On the other hand, farmers’ risk aversion was negatively correlated with WTP for both technologies. This result suggests that encouraging risk reduction options, such as agricultural insurance, could be a useful policy strategy for boosting farmers’ demand for improved agricultural technologies.

show abstract

“…As discussed in Section 2.2 , with structural transformation we would expect to see a shift away from a reliance on farm income, even within the rural population ( Barrett et al 2017a , 2017b ). We next explore the income portfolios of rural households in Table 6 , especially focusing on the income shares derived from crop production, livestock production, and agricultural wages, which together comprise the household's share of farm income.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Definitions of “rural” and “urban” and understandings of economic transformation: Evidence from Tanzania

Wineman

Alia

Anderson

2020

Journal of Rural Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Designing effective policies for economic development often entails categorizing populations by their rural or urban status. Yet there exists no universal definition of what constitutes an “urban” area, and countries alternately apply criteria related to settlement size, population density, or economic advancement. In this study, we explore the implications of applying different urban definitions, focusing on Tanzania for illustrative purposes. Toward this end, we refer to nationally representative household survey data from Tanzania, collected in 2008 and 2014, and categorize households as urban or rural using seven distinct definitions. These are based on official administrative categorizations, population densities, daytime and nighttime satellite imagery, local economic characteristics, and subjective assessments of Google Earth images. These definitions are then applied in some common analyses of demographic and economic change. We find that these urban definitions produce different levels of urbanization. Thus, Tanzania's urban population share based on administrative designations was 28% in 2014, though this varies from 12% to 39% with alternative urban definitions. Some indicators of economic development, such as the level of rural poverty or the rate of rural electrification, also shift markedly when measured with different urban definitions. The periodic (official) recategorization of places as rural or urban, as occurs with the decennial census, results in a slower rate of rural poverty decline than would be measured with time-constant boundaries delimiting rural Tanzania. Because the outcomes of analysis are sensitive to the urban definitions used, policy makers should give attention to the definitions that underpin any statistics used in their decision making.

show abstract

The structural transformation of African agriculture and rural spaces: introduction to a special section^†

Cited by 26 publications

References 38 publications

The changing face of agriculture in Tanzania: Indicators of transformation

The changing face of agriculture in Tanzania: Indicators of transformation

Farmers’ Willingness to Pay for Improved Agricultural Technologies: Evidence from a Field Experiment in Tanzania

Definitions of “rural” and “urban” and understandings of economic transformation: Evidence from Tanzania

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

The structural transformation of African agriculture and rural spaces: introduction to a special section†

Cited by 26 publications

References 38 publications

The changing face of agriculture in Tanzania: Indicators of transformation

The changing face of agriculture in Tanzania: Indicators of transformation

Farmers’ Willingness to Pay for Improved Agricultural Technologies: Evidence from a Field Experiment in Tanzania

Definitions of “rural” and “urban” and understandings of economic transformation: Evidence from Tanzania

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

The structural transformation of African agriculture and rural spaces: introduction to a special section^†