Adoption of innovation and farm productivity in the Sudano-Saharan zone in Cameroon

Figures & data

Figure 1. Agro-ecologicalzoning of the northern and Far North regions in Cameroon.

Source: Adapted from, Dugué et al. (1994).

Table 1. Conditional income expectations, treatment effect and heterogeneity effects

Sub-sample	Stages of the decision
	Adopted innovation	No adopted innovation	treatment effect
Farmers adopted innovation	(a) $E\left(Y_{1i}\left|A_i=1\right.\right)$	(c) $E\left(Y_{2i}\left|A_i=1\right.\right)$	TT
Farmers no adopted innovation	(d) $E\left(Y_{1i}\left|A_i=0\right.\right)$	(b) $E\left(Y_{2i}\left|A_i=0\right.\right)$	TU
Heterogeneity effects	$B{H}_1$	$B{H}_2$	$TH$

Source : DiFalco et al. (2011)

Table 2. Descriptive statistics

Variables	Designation	Innovation adoption	No adoption	Together
		Average	Average	Average
Capital	CPT	19018.12(14040.15)	22753.65(13370)	20650.1(13867)
Work	TRL	10364.2(11686.15)	11236.84(11432)	10745.4(11576)
Productivity in kg	Production/hectare	4311.1(34875.6)	1224.3(4328.04)	2962.5(26357)
Innovation Adoption	1=yes 2=no	…	…	0.5631(0.4963)
Types of innovation adoption	Diversification of culture	…	…	0.7698(.4213)
	Construction of bunds	…	…	0.5035(0.5003)
	Improved seeds	…	…	0.6033(0.4895)
	Decrease of the cultivated area	…	…	0.3467(0.4763)
Area	In hectare	8.872(8.002)	8.714(6.361)	8.803(7.326)
Sex of operator	Male	0.9064(0.2916)	0.888(0.3147)	0.8987(0.3018)
Age of operator	Under 30 years old	0.1280(0.3346)	0.2095(0.4076)	0.1636(0.3702)
	[30–50 years old]	0.5467(0.4984)	0.5333(0.4997)	0.5409(0.4986)
	Over 50 years old	0.3251(0.4689)	0.2571(0.4377)	0.2954(0.4565)
Education level	Primary	0.2906(0.4546)	0.3841(0.4871)	0.3315(0.4711)
	Secondary	0.2389(0.4269)	0.2888(0.4539)	0.2607(0.4393)
	Superior	0.0345(0.1827)	0.0254(0.1575)	0.0305(0.1721)
Size of manage in age	[6–14 years old]	1.997(1.822)	1.311(1.692)	1.6976(1.798)
	[15–21 years old]	1.953(2.17284	1.60 (1.727)	1.8016(1.997)
	[22–30 years old]	1.505(10.883)	1.285(1.612)	0.409(0.772)
	[31–50 years old]	1.887(20.978)	1.8444(1.8523)	0.868(2.547)
	Over 50 years old	0.3842(0.7504)	0.4095(0.7362)	0.3953(0.7438)
State support and advice to farmers	Appui conseil	0.2167(0.4125)	0.1460(0.3537)	0.1858(0.3892)
Household income in thousand FCFA	Less than 50	0.3448(0.4759)	0.2095(0.4076)	0.2857(70.326)
	[50–100]	0.1453(0.3528)	0.1619(0.3689)	0.1525(0.3598)
	Over 100	0.3546(0.4790)	0.4349(0.4965)	0.3897(0.4880)
Method of obtaining the exploited parcel of land	Purchase	0.1527(0.3601)	0.2381(0.4266)	0.1900(0.3926)
	Rental	0.1305(0.3373)	0.2000(0.4006)	0.1608(0.3676)
	Others	0.1330(0.3399)	0.1079(0.3108)	0.1220(0.3276)
Livestock farm	Breeding	0.2980(0.4579)	0.3301(0.4710)	0.3120(0.4636)
Intention to improve the future production system	Adaptability	0.9384(0.2407)	0.8793(0.3262)	0.9126(0.2826)
Belonging to an operator group	Member of a group	0.2438(0.4299)	0.1650(0.3718)	0.2094(0.4072)
Information on agricultural vulnerability	agricultural vulnerability	0.6650(0.4725)	0.8254(0.3802)	0.7351(0.4416)
The changes observed in recent years	Flood	0.1575(0.3647)	0.2629(0.4409)	0.2034(0.4028)
	Increase Season length	0.7350(0.4418)	0.7013(0.4584)	0.7203(0.4491)
	Price increase input	0.4875(0.5004)	0.5065(0.4584)	0.4957(0.5003)
	Decrease in yield	0.9750(0.1563)	0.8441(0.3633)	0.9180(0.2744)
The changes observed in recent years	Agricultural shocks	0.9950(0.2400)	0.9746(0.1576)	0.9861(0.1170)

Table 3. Estimating innovation adoption and its impact on farms

Variables	Designation	Selection	Innovation adoption	No adoption of innovation
		Coefficient	Coefficient	Coefficient
Travail	TRL	0.0167	0.0272**	−0.00856
		(0.0124)	(0.0125)	(0.0152)
Capital	CPT	−0.0773***	−0.0734***	−0.0299
		(0.0278)	(0.0229)	(0.0391)
Cultivated area	SUPER	−0.108	−0.229**	−0.254**
		(0.0882)	(0.0892)	(0.117)
Gender of operator	Male	0.0570	0.252	0.902***
		(0.179)	(0.178)	(0.204)
Age of operator	Under 30 years old	−0.0787	0.166	0.0622
		(0.174)	(0.185)	(0.199)
	Between 30 et 50 years old	0.0196	0.342***	−0.0553
		(0.124)	(0.122)	(0.150)
Education level	Primary	−0.266**	−0.0941	0.198
		(0.123)	(0.124)	(0.150)
	Secondary	−0.201	0.0663	0.0487
		(0.141)	(0.141)	(0.173)
Size of manage in age group	[6–14 years old]	0.103***	0.125***	−0.00428
		(0.0293)	(0.0306)	(0.0413)
	[15–21 years old]	−0.0132	0.0269	0.0482
		(0.0278)	(0.0270)	(0.0362)
	[22–30 years old]	0.0228	0.0340	0.0218
		(0.0318)	(0.0301)	(0.0397)
	[31–50 years old]	0.00871	0.0912***	0.00858
		(0.0214)	(0.0190)	(0.0342)
State support and advice to farmers	Appui conseil	0.0259	−0.0684	0.0735
		(0.217)	(0.208)	(0.266)
Household income in thousand FCFA	Less than 50	0.0170	−0.524***	−0.0664
		(0.170)	(0.169)	(0.214)
	[50–100]	0.0136	−0.103	0.191
		(0.178)	(0.185)	(0.202)
	over 100	0.0358	−0.255*	0.122
		(0.144)	(0.149)	(0.165)
Method of obtaining the exploited parcel of land	Purchase	−0.139	0.304**	0.0455
		(0.139)	(0.149)	(0.157)
	Rental	−0.182	0.0791	−0.238
		(0.143)	(0.157)	(0.162)
Intention to improve the future production system	Adaptability	0.513***	0.123	0.253
		(0.193)	(0.213)	(0.198)
Member of an agricultural group	Member of an agricultural group	0.270	0.136	−0.440*
		(0.212)	(0.202)	(0.256)
Animal husbandry as a secondary activity	Breeding	−0.225*	−0.285**	0.160
		(0.116)	(0.118)	(0.140)
Information on agricultural vulnerabilit	Agricultural vulnérabilité	−0.562***	−0.0762	1.735***
		(0.150)	(0.137)	(0.231)
The changes observed in recent year	Flood	0.0315	−0.296**	−0.280*
		(0.135)	(0.147)	(0.149)
	Increasing the length of the season	0.106	0.155	0.405***
		(0.127)	(0.124)	(0.151)
	Rising input prices	0.306***	−0.0443	−0.175
		(0.116)	(0.126)	(0.134)
	Lower yields	0.901***	0.215	−0.325
		(0.221)	(0.300)	(0.211)
Perception of agricultural shocks	Agricultural shocks	1.015***	…	… .
		(0.382)
Constant	Constant	−1.310**	6.066***	4.069***
		(0.566)	(0.479)	(0.568)
Sigma	σ	…	1.063*** (0.0572)	1.092*** (0.1147)
Rho	ρ	…	0.7807 (0.0548)	−0.7319 (0.1412)
LR independence test Observation		16.57*** 721

Note: Standard errors in parentheses. * significant at 10%; ** significant at 5%; *** significant at 1%.

Table 4. Impact of innovation adoption on farm productivity

Type of innovation	Designation	Innovation adoption	No-Adoption Of innovation	Treatment effect
Innovation adoption	Adoption	(a) 1274.44(790.62)	(c) 628(145.03)	ATT 646.44(563.54)
	No-adoption	(d) 1586.86(118.50)	(b) 1162.1(791.85)	ATU 424.72(309.89)
Types of agricultural innovations
Diversification of culture	Adoption	(a) 1154.61(616.15)	(c) 66.98(295.4)	ATT 1087.63(558.3)
	No-adoption	(d) 1594.8(1949.3)	(b) 587.96(75.93)	ATU 1006.84(313.7)
Construction of bunds	Adoption	(a) 1217.6(931.9)	(c) 179.44(145.69)	ATT 1038.16(697.2)
	No-adoption	(d) 1282.9(963.7)	(b) 245.57(135.96)	ATU 1037.33(439.9)
Diminution of surfaces area	Adoption	(a) 1265.03(897.1)	(c) 367.12(394.4)	ATT 897.91(751.65)
	No-adoption	(d) 1336.06(655.45)	(b) 1219.8(1061.4)	ATU 116.26(749.56)
User of improved seeds	Adoption	(a) 1133.25(695.2)	(c) 75.2(67.7)	ATT 1058.05(684.8)
	No-adoption	(d) 1812.3(781.6)	(b) 1459.02 (1417.6)	ATU 353.28(375.8)

Note: Standard errors in parentheses. * significant at 10%; ** significant at 5%; *** significant at 1%; (a) = adopters; (b) = no-adopters; (c) = adopters if they had not adopted; (d) = no-adopters if they had adopted; ATT = treatment effect (innovation adoption effect); ATU = adoption effect for farms that did not adopt an innovation.

Table 5. Average effect of innovation adoption on farm productivity by propensity score matching method

Variables	Farm productivity	Innovation adoption	No-adoption of innovation	Treatment effect ATT
Innovation adoption	Nearest Neighbor	1114,8	1010,75	104,03(116,48)***
	Kernel	1114,8	833,51	281,29(114,08)***
Diversification of culture	Nearest Neighbor	1071,6	810,16	261,43(157,34)***
	Kernel	1071,6	1008,63	63(127,67)***
Construction of bunds	Nearest Neighbor	1059,4	884,71	186,88(119,48)***
	Kernel	1044,7	996,6	48,1(113,56)***
Decrease in surface area	Nearest Neighbor	1113,95	780,63	333,321(114,22)***
	Kernel	1113,95	878,006	235,944(126,87)***
Use of improved seeds	Nearest Neighbor	1045,26	1069,33	24,066(122,15)***
	Kernel	1045,91	1020,67	21,24 (101,97)***

Note: Standard errors in parentheses. * significant at 10%; ** significant at 5%; *** significant at 1%;

Dugué, P. Koulandi, J. & Moussa, C. (1994). Diversité des situations agricoles et problématiques de développement de la zone cotonnière. Agricultures des savanes du Cameroun, 43–57.

 Google Scholar

DiFalco, S., Veronesi, M., & Yesuf, M. (2011). Does adaptation to climate change provide food security? A micro-perspective from Ethiopia. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 93(3), 829–846. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajae/aar006

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar