Year Published
- 2008 (0)
- 2009 (6) Apply 2009 filter
- 2010 (0)
- 2011 (0)
- (-) Remove 2012 filter 2012
- 2013 (0)
- 2014 (0)
- 2015 (0)
- (-) Remove 2016 filter 2016
- 2017 (3) Apply 2017 filter
- 2018 (1) Apply 2018 filter
- (-) Remove 2019 filter 2019
- 2020 (0)
- 2021 (0)
Research Topics
Populations
- Countries/Governments (0)
- Rural Populations (0)
- Smallholder Farmers (1) Apply Smallholder Farmers filter
- Women (0)
Types of Research
- Data Analysis (2) Apply Data Analysis filter
- Literature Review (4) Apply Literature Review filter
- Portfolio Review (0)
- Research Brief (0)
Geography
- East Africa Region and Selected Countries (4) Apply East Africa Region and Selected Countries filter
- Global (2) Apply Global filter
- South Asia Region and Selected Countries (2) Apply South Asia Region and Selected Countries filter
- Southern Africa Region and Selected Countries (0)
- Sub-Saharan Africa (0)
- West Africa Region and Selected Countries (0)
Dataset
Current search
- (-) Remove Household Well-Being & Equity filter Household Well-Being & Equity
- (-) Remove Agricultural Inputs & Farm Management filter Agricultural Inputs & Farm Management
- (-) Remove Research & Development filter Research & Development
- (-) Remove Technology Adoption filter Technology Adoption
- (-) Remove Education & Training filter Education & Training
- (-) Remove Other Datasets filter Other Datasets
- (-) Remove 2016 filter 2016
- (-) Remove 2019 filter 2019
- (-) Remove Global & Regional Public Goods filter Global & Regional Public Goods
- (-) Remove 2012 filter 2012
- (-) Remove Food Security & Nutrition filter Food Security & Nutrition
Studies of improved seed adoption in developing countries almost always draw from household surveys and are premised on the assumption that farmers are able to self-report their use of improved seed varieties. However, recent studies suggest that farmers’ reports of the seed varieties planted, or even whether seed is local or improved, are sometimes inconsistent with the results of DNA fingerprinting of farmers' crops. We use household survey data from Tanzania to test the alignment between farmer-reported and DNA-identified maize seed types planted in fields. In the sample, 70% of maize seed observations are correctly reported as local or improved, while 16% are type I errors (falsely reported as improved) and 14% are type II errors (falsely reported as local). Type I errors are more likely to have been sourced from other farmers, rather than formal channels. An analysis of input use, including seed, fertilizer, and labor allocations, reveals that farmers tend to treat improved maize differently, depending on whether they correctly perceive it as improved. This suggests that errors in farmers' seed type awareness may translate into suboptimal management practices. In econometric analysis, the measured yield benefit of improved seed use is smaller in magnitude with a DNA-derived categorization, as compared with farmer reports. The greatest yield benefit is with correctly identified improved seed. This indicates that investments in farmers' access to information, seed labeling, and seed system oversight are needed to complement investments in seed variety development.
There is a wide gap between realized and potential yields for many crops in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). Experts identify poor soil quality as a primary constraint to increased agricultural productivity. Therefore, increasing agricultural productivity by improving soil quality is seen as a viable strategy to enhance food security. Yet adoption rates of programs focused on improving soil quality have generally been lower than expected. We explore a seldom considered factor that may limit farmers’ demand for improved soil quality, namely, whether farmers’ self-assessments of their soil quality match soil scientists’ assessments. In this paper, using Tanzania National Panel Survey (TZNPS) data, part of the Living Standards Measurement Study – Integrated Surveys on Agriculture (LSMS-ISA), we compare farmers’ own assessments of soil quality with scientific measurements of soil quality from the Harmonized World Soil Database (HWSD). We find a considerable “mismatch” and most notably, that 11.5 percent of survey households that reported having “good” soil quality are measured by scientific standards to have severely constrained nutrient availability. Mismatches between scientific measurements and farmer assessments of soil quality may highlight a potential barrier for programs seeking to encourage farmers to adopt soil quality improvement activities.
This brief reviews the various definitions of global public goods (GPGs) and regional public goods (RPGs) found in the literature and provides examples of each in six frequently discussed sectors: environment, health, knowledge, security, governance, and infrastructure. We identify multiple alternative definitions that have gained some traction in the literature, but GPGs are generally agreed to exhibit publicness in consumption, distribution of benefits, and decision-making. Because policy choices determine what is and what is not a GPG, there cannot be a fixed list of such goods; some always have the property of global publicness, while others have over time changed from being local or national to being global in terms of benefits and costs. GPGs are thus redefined as goods that are in the global public domain. GPG and RPG financing mechanisms include payments by users and beneficiaries, taxes, fees, and levies, private funding by non-profit corporations, profit-making firms, and philanthropic individuals and organizations, national and international public resources, and partnerships between several sources of financing. We conclude with an analysis of trends in GPG and RPG financing through Official Development Assistance (ODA) using time series data from the OECD’s Creditor Reporting System and other sources. We find that 14% of ODA in 2014 was allocated to sub-sectors labelled by Reiner et al. as GPGs, while 15% of ODA was allocated to RPGs, and that GPG and RPG spending has steadily increased from 2002-2014.
This report provides a general overview of the wheat market in Bangladesh. The first section describes trends in wheat production and consumption over the past twenty years and summarizes recent trade policy related to wheat. The second section presents the findings of a literature review of the wheat value chain in Bangladesh, beginning with seed selection and ending with sales. Finally, wheat consumption in Bangladesh is discussed in more depth, including nutritional information about wheat, substitute grain markets, and projected consumption in 2030. We find that wheat production in Bangladesh has been volatile and continues to reflect significant yield gaps. While wheat consumption has increased, rice is the most important crop and food grain. Increased demand by private traders for higher quality wheat for processing has fueled rising import levels, and the the gap between domestic supply and demand is projected to grow to over 4 million tons by 2030.
Over the past 20 years, global wheat production and consumption have increased significantly. Production has increased 28%, or about 1.3% annually, and consumption has increased about 24%, or 1.1% annually. A small number of countries consistently account for over 90% of the export market, but the import market is more diversified and involves many more countries. Wheat is primarily used for food, seed, and industry; only 20% of wheat production is used for animal feed. This brief provides a global overview of the wheat value chain, but with specific attention to three focus countries: Ethiopia, India (specifically the Bihar region), and Bangladesh. While these three countries currently have a limited impact in the global wheat market, projections of wheat production and demand suggest that over the next 20 years demand in Bangladesh and Ethiopia will increasingly exceed supply, while India will become a net importer by 2030.
This report provides a general overview of the wheat market in Ethiopia. The first section describes trends in wheat production and consumption over the past twenty years and summarizes recent trade policy related to wheat. The second section presents the findings of a literature review of the wheat value chain in Ethiopia, beginning with seed research and ending with sales. The third section outlines the nutritional content of wheat as well as potential substitutes. Finally, wheat consumption in Ethiopia is discussed in more depth, including the role of wheat in Ethiopian diets, substitute grain markets, and projected consumption in 2030. We find that over the past twenty years, wheat production and consumption have both increased in Ethiopia despite the existence of strong markets for potential substitute grains. The Ethiopian government has played an active role in wheat markets, such as making large investments in extension programs and adopting protectionist policies to ensure government control of all commercial grain imports. Despite these efforts, Ethiopia is expected to face a growing supply deficit in the absence of increased domestic productivity and/or changes to government policy.