Linking nutrition education and farm production diversification to fruit and vegetable consumption in Zimbabwe

Figures & data

Figure 1. Survey districts.

Table 1. Sample summary statistics

Variable	Description	Mean	Std. Dev.
Dietary diversity	Household consumption of food groups	5.8	2.7
Fruits	Consumed fruits in past 24 hours (1=yes)	38%	49%
Vegetables	Consumed vegetables in past 24 hours (1=yes)	83%	37%
Fruit frequency	Frequency ate fruits	1.5	2.4
Vegetable frequency	Frequency ate vegetables	4.7	2.8
Nutrition education	Received nutrition information (1=yes)	74%	44%
Farm production diversification	Livestock and crop species grown (count)	6	2.5
Market participation	Sold livestock and crop (1=yes)	98%	14%
Age	Age of head in years	53	14
Head gender	Head is male (1=yes)	72%	45%
Marital status	Head married (1=yes)	74%	44%
Education	Attained secondary education or above (1=yes)	49%	50%
Size of household	Number of household members	5.7	2.6
Orphans	Number of orphans	0.47	0.96
Chronically ill	Number chronically ill	0.095	0.31
Land size	Total land owned (hectares)	3.2	2.8
Total monthly income	Total household income (USD)	107	243
Instrument
Social network	Count of households accessing nutrition education in a ward	45.7	23.5

Table 2. Correlating nutrition education and production diversity to household dietary diversity

	IRR
	Coef	Std. err.
Nutrition education	1.53***	0.220
Farm production diversity	1.021***	0.006
Market participation	0.96	0.051
Age	0.99	0.004
Age*age	1.00	0.000
Head gender	0.99	0.037
Marital status	1.015	0.038
Education	1.057**	0.022
Household size	0.99***	0.004
Orphans	0.99	0.011
Chronic	1.013	0.028
Land	1.009***	0.003
Income	1.0001***	0.000
District dummies	Yes	Yes
Constant	3.93***	0.72
Number of observations	1222

*, ** and *** is level of significance at 10%, 5%, and 1%, respectively. Model estimated using IV poisson

Table 3. Correlating nutrition education and production diversification to consumption of fruits and vegetables

	Fruits (probit)		Fruits (IV probit)		Vegetables (IV probit)
	IRR	Std. err	IRR	Std. err.	IRR	Std. err.
Nutrition education	1.50***	0.22	1.66	1.10	1.18***	1.34
Farm production diversity	1.05*	0.03	1.05**	0.03	1.00	0.03
Market participation	0.31***	0.13	0.52**	0.14	1.00	0.00
Age	1.04	0.03	1.00	0.02	1.00	0.02
Age*age	1.00	0.00	1.00	0.00	1.00	0.00
Head gender	1.05	0.23	0.92	0.14	1.21	0.20
Marital status	0.96	0.22	1.04	0.16	0.87	0.15
Education	1.02	0.14	1.14	0.11	1.13	0.14
Household size	0.95**	0.02	0.98	0.02	0.97	0.02
Orphans	0.91	0.06	0.93	0.04	0.94	0.05
Chronic	1.25	0.24	1.21	0.15	1.15	0.15
Land	0.92***	0.02	0.99	0.02	1.00	0.01
Income	1.00	0.00	1.00	0.00	1.00	0.00
District dummies	Yes		Yes		Yes
$ath\left(\rho \right)$	-	-	0.93	0.25	0.19***	0.07
Lnsigma	-	-	0.39***	0.01	0.39***	0.01
Wald test (Prob > chi2)			0.7930		0.0000
Number of observations	1222		1222		969
Loglikelihood	−814.39***		−1314***		−601***

*, ** and *** is level of significance at 10%, 5%, and 1%, respectively

Table 4. Correlating nutrition education and production diversification to frequency of fruit and vegetable consumption

	Fruits		Vegetables
	IRR	Std. err.	IRR	Std. err.
Nutrition education	0.62	0.38	1.99**	6.05
Farm production diversity	1.08***	0.03	0.95	0.04
Market participation	0.52***	0.10	1.42	0.46
Age	1.01	0.03	1.01	0.02
Age*age	1.00	0.00	1.00	0.00
Head gender	0.87	0.16	1.02	0.13
Marital status	1.19	0.22	1.06	0.13
Education	1.15	0.13	0.89	0.12
Household size	0.97	0.02	0.99	0.01
Orphans	0.99	0.06	0.94	0.05
Chronic	1.17	0.17	0.99	0.13
Land	0.98	0.02	1.02	0.03
Income	1.00**	0.00	1.00	0.00
District dummies	Yes		Yes
Number of observations	1222		1222

*, ** and *** is level of significance at 10%, 5%, and 1%, respectively