Adoption of improved maize variety among farm households in the northern region of Ghana

Figures & data

Table 1. Summary definition of variables

Variable	Definition/Measurement	Mean	SD
Gender	1 = if respondent is male	0.59	0.493
Male Head	1 = if household head is male	0.59	0.493
Age	Age of household in years	42.47	10.53
Household size	Number of persons	7.46	5.649
Education	Years spent in formal schooling	5.863	4.075
Experience	Years in crop farming	20.26	11.768
Seed availability	1 = if seed is available in the market	0.939	0.239
Labor availability	1 = if labor is readily available	0.691	0.308
Distance	Proximity to farm plot in kilometers	5.514	21.738
Extension contact	1 = if the farmer had received extension services by an extension agent	0.67	0.32
Farm credit	1 = if farmer have accessed farm credit	0.393	0.198
Demonstration fields	1 = if farmer have visited demonstration farm	0.470	0.5
Workshop/conference	1 = if farmer have attended workshop/conference	0.385	0.487
Farm size	In acres	4.447	4.335
Previous farm income	Amount in Ghana Cedis (GH¢)	4,673	3,342.103

Notes: SD denotes standard deviation; US$1 = GH¢3.89 at the time of the survey.

Table 2. Multinomial logit regression of factors influencing adoption of IMV

Variable	Probability of adopting IMV over local variety		Probability of adopting both improved and local varieties over only local variety
	RRR	Std. Error	RRR	Std. Error
Age of household head	0.971***	0.029	0.929***	0.036
Household size	1.137***	0.057	1.133***	0.073
Availability of seed	23.353	71.635	63.666	202.888
Experience	1.034***	0.028	1.071***	0.039
Workshop attendance	3.203***	0.977	1.455***	0.099
Educational level	1.083***	0.046	1.016***	0.057
Access to credit	2.894	2.478	7.703***	2.214
Membership of FBO	2.895**	1.472	1.409***	0.516
Labor	2.350***	0.626	4.386***	1.370
Extension contacts	12.099	11.998	1.099***	0.098
Number of Observations 200		LR χ^2 (20) 147.97	Prob. > χ^2 0.0000	Pseudo R^2 0.3620

* Significance level, respectively, at 10%.

** Significance level, respectively, at 5%.

*** Significance level, respectively, at 1%.

Table 3. Results of adoption intensity from Tobit and Transformed OLS models

Variable	The Tobit model		Transformed OLS
	Coefficient	Std. Error	Coefficient	Std. Error
Gender	0.4285	0.2921	−0.2186	0.4278
Household head	−0.0639	0.5483	−0.0671	0.7434
Age of the household head	−0.0809	0.0180	−0.0097	0.0237
Years in formal education	0.0746***	0.0270	0.0859**	0.0355
Household size	0.0492*	0.0278	0.0374	0.0369
Number of years in farming	0.0234	0.0176	0.0245	0.0224
Distance to farm plot	−0.0322*	0.0194	0.0082	0.0083
Access to credit	0.0672	0.3082	−0.1542	0.5129
Participation in farm demonstration field	1.1068***	0.3174	1.4818***	0.4359
Farmer-based organization	1.4627*	0.7550	1.2126	0.9158
Farm size	0.1789***	0.0690	0.1645***	0.0628
Previous income from farm	−0.0001***	0.0000	−0.0001**	0.0000
Constant	−2.1749	0.8001	0.3578	0.9373
Summary of the models
Sigma (δ)	1.3862***	0.9954
Log Pseudolikehood	165.4063
Prob. > F	0.0012
Pseudo R^2	0.2054		0.2182
Breush-pagan Heteroskdasticity
χ^2 (12)			5.56
Prob. > χ^2			0.9368
Mean VIF			1.88

* Denotes statistical level of significance at 1%, respectively

** Denotes statistical level of significance at 5%, respectively.

*** Denotes statistical level of significance at 10%, respectively.