| Summary: | This article comprehensively examines the impact of integrated pest management‐farmer field school (IPM‐FFS) on yield, insecticide expenditures, labor expenditures, herbicide expenditures, fertilizer expenditures, and profit, based on data from onion producers in the Philippines. Propensity score matching (PSM) and regression‐based approaches that account for potential bias due to selection problems from observable variables are used to achieve the objective of the study. Sensitivity of our IPM‐FFS impact results to potential bias due to “selection on unobservables” was also assessed. We find that farmers who participate in the IPM‐FFS training program have statistically lower insecticide expenditures than the non‐IPM‐FFS farmers. But we do not find any evidence that the IPM‐FFS training program significantly affects yield and the other inputs. There is some evidence indicating that IPM‐FFS farmers may have statistically higher profit levels than non‐IPM‐FFS producers, but these results are sensitive to and may still be invalidated by bias due to unobservable variables. Since IPM‐FFS seem to only significantly reduce insecticide use, policymakers and extension educators may need to adjust the IPM‐FFS curriculum to further emphasize (or include) other agronomic practices that also optimize the use of other inputs like labor, fertilizer, and herbicides. The more efficient use of all inputs would likely reduce total expenditures and eventually translate to higher incomes.
|
|---|