Production technology adoption and electronic market participation intensity of chilli (dry) farmers in India: Application of triple-hurdle model

Figures & data

Figure 1. Illustration of THM.

Table 1. Description of the variables in the empirical models

Decisions/ Hurdles	Variable	Variable name	Variable type	Variable measurement
	Dependent Variables
1. Adoption	AD	AD of ‘Teja’ variety of chilli	Binary	1 if farmer adopts ‘Teja’ variety of chilli, 0 otherwise
2.Market Participation Decision	MPD	e-MPD by chilli farmer	Binary	0: No participation in the e-market 1: Farmer only purchases inputs only from the e-market 2: Farmer only sells output in the e-market 3: Both purchase of inputs and sale of output in the e-market
3. Market Participation Intensity	MPI● TVB● NVRO● NVRIO	e-MPI by chilli farmers	Continuous	● TVB of inputs from e-market● NVRO from the sale of output only from e-market● NVRIO from the purchase of inputs and sale of output from e-market
Exogenous Variables
AGE		Age of the farmer	Continuous	Age in years
EDU		Education of the sample farmer	Continuous	Number of years of education
FEXP		Farming Experience	Continuous	Number of years engaged in crop production
LHS		Size of land holding	Continuous	Acres of land under chilli cultivation
PS		Price of chilli seed in e-market	Continuous	Rupees per kg
TV		Training Visits by e-market personnel	Continuous	Number of training visits to farmer’s field
EXTN		Access to extension network	Binary	1 if farmer has access, 0 otherwise
ATHYV		Access to high yielding varieties in e-market	Binary	1 if farmer has access, 0 otherwise
FPOM		Membership in FPO	Binary	1 if farmer has FPO membership, 0 otherwise
ATMI		Access to market information from e-market	Binary	1 if farmer has access, 0 otherwise
PDI		Prompt disposal of inputs from e-market	Binary	1 if farmer receives inputs promptly, 0 otherwise
PPSP		Prompt payment of sales proceeds to farmer from e-market	Binary	1 if farmer receives prompt payment from e-market transactions, 0 otherwise

Table 2. Descriptive statistics of sample farmers according to market participation status

Variables	No e-market participation (a)	e-market participation			Pooled	Test of difference
		Input buyers only (b)	Sale of output only (c)	Both purchase of inputs and sale of output (d)		(b-a)	(c-a)	(d-a)
AGE	50.23	47.28	53.61	49.77	48.51	1.61	1.17	1.69
EDU	5.61	10.23	8.17	9.29	7.06	0.73**	0.78**	0.89**
FEXP	20.27	18.26	22.16	20.61	22.37	0.91	0.62	0.57
LHS	1.21	4.96	3.19	3.86	2.11	3.81**	2.06*	2.73**
PS	69.18	75.63	71.28	77.49	72.18	0.19	0.23	0.14
TV	4.07	12.33	15.19	14.67	10.13	0.56**	0.71**	0.62**
EXTN	0.29	0.77	0.71	0.62	0.64	0.69**	0.82**	0.74**
ATHYV	0.41	0.84	0.71	0.74	0.61	0.96**	0.64**	0.79**
FPOM	0.21	0.79	0.88	0.81	0.70	0.82**	0.86**	0.84**
ATMI	0.34	0.69	0.82	0.78	0.72	0.82**	1.91**	0.79**
PDI	–	0.79	–	0.84	0.82	–	–	–
PPSP	–	–	0.92	0.83	0.88	–	–	–
Outcome variables from e-market
TVB (Rs)	–	10311.59	–	–	–	–	–	–
NVRO (Rs)	–	–	162376.61	–	–	–	–	–
NVRIO (Rs)	–	–	–	171956.34	–	–	–	–
n	73	103	231	93	–	–	–	–

Note: ** & * - Significant at 1 and 5 per cent levels, respectively.

Table 3. THM estimates for e-MPI (bivariate lognormal)

Variables	Decision 1		Decision 2		Decision 3 (e-MPI)
	AD		e-MPD		logTVB		logNVRO		logNVRIO
	Coefficient	SE	Coefficient	SE	Coefficient	SE	Coefficient	SE	Coefficient	SE
AGE	0.0077	0.0116	0.0392*	0.0189	–	–	–	–	–	–
AGE^2	0.0004	0.0003	0.0156**	0.0051	–	–	–	–	–	–
EDU	0.0066	0.0136	0.2309**	0.0770	0.3052*	0.1502	0.3716**	0.1192	0.4019**	0.1151
FEXP	0.0475**	0.0139	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
LHS	0.0297*	0.0148	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
EXTN	0.4004**	0.1407	3.4447**	1.3437	3.3407*	1.5946	0.5514*	0.2546	3.9514*	1.7946
ATHYV	0.3486**	0.1172	1.9901**	0.3933	1.7766*	0.8145	3.1267**	0.9258	4.8903**	1.4675
PS	−0.0215*	0.0104	−0.2033**	0.0599	−0.0293**	0.0097	–	–	−0.0562**	0.0184
ATMI	0.5240*	0.2507	0.6406**	0.2466	0.4216*	0.1918	0.4010**	0.1462	0.6010**	0.2460
FPOM	0.6554**	0.2491	0.9930**	0.3212	1.4597**	0.4216	0.5032*	0.2474	7.5032**	2.2076
TV	–	–	0.4308**	0.1206	0.2422**	0.0548	0.0619**	0.0100	0.3619**	0.1002
PDI	–	–	–	–	0.3520**	0.1070	–	–	0.5492**	0.1823
PPSP	–	–	–	–	–	–	0.0137**	0.0025	0.5137**	0.2052
IMRp	–	–	−4.6146**	1.2143	−7.6857**	2.4938	−7.2346*	3.2979	−5.0984**	1.0979
IMRB	–	–	–	–	−1.6136**	0.2480
IMRs					-	-	−1.0834**	0.2965
IMRBS	-	-	-	-	-	-			−2.6324**	0.5102
CONS	0.4920	0.0754	–	–	15.2487	6.3862	13.3857	5.9838	13.3857**	3.9838
LR (χ^2)	LR χ^2 (10) = 21.62**		LR χ^2 (13) = 28.15**		–		–		–
R^2	0.21		0.33		0.81**		0.89**		0.82**
n	500		427		103		231		93

Note: ** & * - Significant at 1 and 5 percent levels, respectively.

Table 4. One-step method estimates for e-MPI (bivariate lognormal) by the farmers cultivating “Teja” variety of chilli

Variables	logTVB		logNVRO		logNVRIO
	Coefficient	SE	Coefficient	SE	Coefficient	SE
AGE	−0.0022	0.0025	−0.0014	0.0024	−0.0007	0.0030
EDU	0.0029	0.0027	0.0233	0.0125	0.0106**	0.0042
EDU^2	0.0003	0.0001	0.0005	0.0004	0.0030	0.0016
FEXP	−0.0002	0.0030	0.0008	0.0027	0.0028	0.0037
LHS	0.0220**	0.0031	0.0201**	0.0028	0.2039**	0.0147
EXTN	0.0140	0.0433	0.2221**	0.0499	0.2181**	0.0667
ATHYV	0.0457**	0.0165	0.1217**	0.0439	0.2324**	0.0784
PS	−0.0052*	0.0024	−0.0167	0.0114	−0.0011	0.0034
ATMI	0.0115**	0.0051	0.1623**	0.0588	0.1246*	0.0611
FPOM	0.0294	0.0494	0.3209**	0.0510	0.3791**	0.0632
TV	0.0213**	0.0075	0.3045**	0.0175	0.2196**	0.0520
PDI	0.2248**	0.0480	–	–	0.2328**	0.0705
PPSP	–	–	0.3072**	0.0540	0.2077**	0.0691
CONS	3.7259	0.2236	4.8897	0.2180	4.6110	0.4041
Goodness of fit
R^2	0.61		0.72		0.66
n	103		231		93

Note: ** & * - Significant at 1 and 5 per cent levels, respectively.

Table 5. DHM estimates for e-MPI (bivariate lognormal)

Variables	Decision 1		Decision 2 (MPI)
	MPD		logTVB		logNVRO		logNVRIO
	Coefficient	SE	Coefficient	SE	Coefficient	SE	Coefficient	SE
AGE	0.0043	0.0100	−0.0020	0.0023	−0.0019	0.0025	−0.0007	0.0030
EDU	0.0460**	0.0114	−0.0031	0.0027	0.0040	0.0026	0.1102	0.3143
EDU^2	0.0053**	0.0017	0.0001	0.0012	0.0000	0.0000	0.0000	0.0000
FEXP	0.0166	0.0119	–	–	–	–	–	–
LHS	0.0104	0.0126	–	–	–	–	–	–
EXTN	0.4156*	0.2071	0.1492*	0.0682	−0.0108	0.0645	0.0076	0.0870
ATHYV	0.4491*	0.2203	0.1569*	0.0753	–	–	0.0493	0.1181
PS	−0.0319**	0.0089	−0.0072**	0.0022	–	–	−0.0007	0.0040
ATMI	0.5893	0.4190	0.1334**	0.0511	0.2291**	0.0646	0.1351*	0.0639
FPOM	0.6395**	0.2205	−0.1411	0.0807	0.3126**	0.0683	0.1860**	0.0737
TV	–	–	0.0311*	0.0150	0.1076**	0.0132	0.0163	0.0209
PDI	–	–	0.0236	0.0523	–	–	−0.0273	0.0775
PPSP	–	–	–	–	0.2287**	0.0589	0.2215**	0.0775
IMR1	–	–	−0.3622**	0.1316	−0.4274**	0.1533	−0.5470	0.3210
CONS	–	–	3.7520	0.4078	4.7554	0.4408	4.7104	0.6565
Goodness of fit
LR (χ^2)	−41.22**		–		–		–
Pseudo R^2/R^2	0.13		0.63		0.69		0.71
n	427		103		231		93

Note: ** & * - Significant at 1 and 5 per cent levels, respectively.

Table

Mandal	District	Name of FPO	Number of Farmers
Macherla	Guntur	Agriculture Related Producers Mutually Aided Cooperative Federation Ltd	3143
Durgi	Guntur	Vyavasaya Mariyu Anubanda Raitu Utpatti Darula Sangam	2453
Pedanandipadu	Guntur	Vyavasaya Mariyu Anubanda Raitu Utpatti Darula Sangam	2031
Veldurthy	Guntur	Agri Related Ppsss Ltd	2002
Bollapalli	Guntur	Vyavasaya Mariyu Anubanda Raitu Utpatti Darula Sangam	1975
Amaravathi	Guntur	Agri & Allied Producers Cooperative Society	1885
Chandarlapadu	Krishna	Utpathidala Paraspara Sahayaka Sangam	2650
Vetsavai	Krishna	Vetsavai Mandal FPO	1832
Dornala	Prakasam	Vyavasaya Mariyu Anubanda Utpatti Darula Sangam	2245
Peddakadabur	Kurnool	Agri And Allied Producers Macs Ltd.	1807

Source: Officials from Kalgudi e-market.