Guidance and technology: an assessment of project intervention and promoted technologies
This study used primary data, collected as part of the Cereal Systems Initiative for South Asia (CSISA) project to compare net returns and cost efficiency between farmers who are beneficiaries of the project to farmers who are not beneficiaries. Additionally, non-beneficiary farmers who use the prom...
| Autores principales: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | Journal Article |
| Lenguaje: | Inglés |
| Publicado: |
Elsevier
2012
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://hdl.handle.net/10568/165813 |
| _version_ | 1855530670695120896 |
|---|---|
| author | Pede, Valerien O. McKinley, Justin D. Sharma, Raman Kumar, Anurag |
| author_browse | Kumar, Anurag McKinley, Justin D. Pede, Valerien O. Sharma, Raman |
| author_facet | Pede, Valerien O. McKinley, Justin D. Sharma, Raman Kumar, Anurag |
| author_sort | Pede, Valerien O. |
| collection | Repository of Agricultural Research Outputs (CGSpace) |
| description | This study used primary data, collected as part of the Cereal Systems Initiative for South Asia (CSISA) project to compare net returns and cost efficiency between farmers who are beneficiaries of the project to farmers who are not beneficiaries. Additionally, non-beneficiary farmers who use the promoted technologies from the project are compared to other non-beneficiary farmers who do not use the promoted technologies. Propensity score matching is used to account for selection bias when comparing the outcomes of beneficiary and control groups. Results indicate higher return for project recipients as well as farmers who use the CSISA promoted resource-conserving technologies (RCTs). |
| format | Journal Article |
| id | CGSpace165813 |
| institution | CGIAR Consortium |
| language | Inglés |
| publishDate | 2012 |
| publishDateRange | 2012 |
| publishDateSort | 2012 |
| publisher | Elsevier |
| publisherStr | Elsevier |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | CGSpace1658132024-12-19T14:12:58Z Guidance and technology: an assessment of project intervention and promoted technologies Pede, Valerien O. McKinley, Justin D. Sharma, Raman Kumar, Anurag cost benefit analysis farmers innovation adoption productivity technology transfer This study used primary data, collected as part of the Cereal Systems Initiative for South Asia (CSISA) project to compare net returns and cost efficiency between farmers who are beneficiaries of the project to farmers who are not beneficiaries. Additionally, non-beneficiary farmers who use the promoted technologies from the project are compared to other non-beneficiary farmers who do not use the promoted technologies. Propensity score matching is used to account for selection bias when comparing the outcomes of beneficiary and control groups. Results indicate higher return for project recipients as well as farmers who use the CSISA promoted resource-conserving technologies (RCTs). 2012 2024-12-19T12:55:30Z 2024-12-19T12:55:30Z Journal Article https://hdl.handle.net/10568/165813 en Open Access Elsevier Pede, Valerien O.; McKinley, Justin D.; Sharma, Raman and Kumar, Anurag. 2012. Guidance and technology: an assessment of project intervention and promoted technologies. Procedia Economics and Finance, Volume 2 p. 373-382 |
| spellingShingle | cost benefit analysis farmers innovation adoption productivity technology transfer Pede, Valerien O. McKinley, Justin D. Sharma, Raman Kumar, Anurag Guidance and technology: an assessment of project intervention and promoted technologies |
| title | Guidance and technology: an assessment of project intervention and promoted technologies |
| title_full | Guidance and technology: an assessment of project intervention and promoted technologies |
| title_fullStr | Guidance and technology: an assessment of project intervention and promoted technologies |
| title_full_unstemmed | Guidance and technology: an assessment of project intervention and promoted technologies |
| title_short | Guidance and technology: an assessment of project intervention and promoted technologies |
| title_sort | guidance and technology an assessment of project intervention and promoted technologies |
| topic | cost benefit analysis farmers innovation adoption productivity technology transfer |
| url | https://hdl.handle.net/10568/165813 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT pedevalerieno guidanceandtechnologyanassessmentofprojectinterventionandpromotedtechnologies AT mckinleyjustind guidanceandtechnologyanassessmentofprojectinterventionandpromotedtechnologies AT sharmaraman guidanceandtechnologyanassessmentofprojectinterventionandpromotedtechnologies AT kumaranurag guidanceandtechnologyanassessmentofprojectinterventionandpromotedtechnologies |