Do as they did: Peer effects explain adoption of conservation agriculture in Malawi

Andrew Bell, Jennifer Zavaleta Cheek, Frazer Mataya, Patrick S. Ward

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Abstract

    Adoption of the trinity of practices known commonly today as conservation agriculture (CA)-maintaining soil cover, reducing tillage, and enhancing soil nitrogen through legumes-is a critical process to the management of erosion in rural landscapes, and maintenance of aquatic habitats and hydropower potential. However, the large literature on the benefits and risks of CA fails to find any universal determinants of adoption, with competing uses for crop residues, availability of labor, and access to physical inputs common constraints appearing in different contexts. We conduct a study in the specific context of Malawi, using ethnographic interviewing to draw out possible decision criteria and machine learning to identify their explanatory power. This study is structured to inform the question: "How do farmers decide to adopt the specific activities of CA in Malawi?" We find that more than any other factor, adoption by neighbors (i.e., peer effects) matters, with possible implications for the overall cost of encouraging CA (e.g., through subsidies) as it is taken up across a landscape. Further, we note that little else within our household survey (save for more detailed articulation of neighbor and neighborhood characteristics) offers greater explanatory power than those factors identified by farmers themselves. Finally, we note that decisions made in the presence of an incentive are structurally different than those made without incentives, validating previous concerns in the literature regarding the basis most CA adoption studies, within CA promotion interventions.

    Original languageEnglish (US)
    Article number51
    JournalWater (Switzerland)
    Volume10
    Issue number1
    DOIs
    StatePublished - Jan 10 2018

    Fingerprint

    Malawi
    peers
    Agriculture
    Conservation
    conservation
    agriculture
    Motivation
    incentive
    farmer
    Soil
    farmers
    Soils
    household surveys
    rural landscape
    water power
    artificial intelligence
    household survey
    hydropower
    great power
    aquatic habitat

    Keywords

    • Conservation agriculture
    • Decision tree modeling
    • Malawi
    • Peer effects

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Biochemistry
    • Geography, Planning and Development
    • Aquatic Science
    • Water Science and Technology

    Cite this

    Do as they did : Peer effects explain adoption of conservation agriculture in Malawi. / Bell, Andrew; Cheek, Jennifer Zavaleta; Mataya, Frazer; Ward, Patrick S.

    In: Water (Switzerland), Vol. 10, No. 1, 51, 10.01.2018.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Bell, Andrew ; Cheek, Jennifer Zavaleta ; Mataya, Frazer ; Ward, Patrick S. / Do as they did : Peer effects explain adoption of conservation agriculture in Malawi. In: Water (Switzerland). 2018 ; Vol. 10, No. 1.
    @article{49e97403f5df46fa9de526c8215f160d,
    title = "Do as they did: Peer effects explain adoption of conservation agriculture in Malawi",
    abstract = "Adoption of the trinity of practices known commonly today as conservation agriculture (CA)-maintaining soil cover, reducing tillage, and enhancing soil nitrogen through legumes-is a critical process to the management of erosion in rural landscapes, and maintenance of aquatic habitats and hydropower potential. However, the large literature on the benefits and risks of CA fails to find any universal determinants of adoption, with competing uses for crop residues, availability of labor, and access to physical inputs common constraints appearing in different contexts. We conduct a study in the specific context of Malawi, using ethnographic interviewing to draw out possible decision criteria and machine learning to identify their explanatory power. This study is structured to inform the question: {"}How do farmers decide to adopt the specific activities of CA in Malawi?{"} We find that more than any other factor, adoption by neighbors (i.e., peer effects) matters, with possible implications for the overall cost of encouraging CA (e.g., through subsidies) as it is taken up across a landscape. Further, we note that little else within our household survey (save for more detailed articulation of neighbor and neighborhood characteristics) offers greater explanatory power than those factors identified by farmers themselves. Finally, we note that decisions made in the presence of an incentive are structurally different than those made without incentives, validating previous concerns in the literature regarding the basis most CA adoption studies, within CA promotion interventions.",
    keywords = "Conservation agriculture, Decision tree modeling, Malawi, Peer effects",
    author = "Andrew Bell and Cheek, {Jennifer Zavaleta} and Frazer Mataya and Ward, {Patrick S.}",
    year = "2018",
    month = "1",
    day = "10",
    doi = "10.3390/w10010051",
    language = "English (US)",
    volume = "10",
    journal = "Water (Switzerland)",
    issn = "2073-4441",
    publisher = "Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI)",
    number = "1",

    }

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Do as they did

    T2 - Peer effects explain adoption of conservation agriculture in Malawi

    AU - Bell, Andrew

    AU - Cheek, Jennifer Zavaleta

    AU - Mataya, Frazer

    AU - Ward, Patrick S.

    PY - 2018/1/10

    Y1 - 2018/1/10

    N2 - Adoption of the trinity of practices known commonly today as conservation agriculture (CA)-maintaining soil cover, reducing tillage, and enhancing soil nitrogen through legumes-is a critical process to the management of erosion in rural landscapes, and maintenance of aquatic habitats and hydropower potential. However, the large literature on the benefits and risks of CA fails to find any universal determinants of adoption, with competing uses for crop residues, availability of labor, and access to physical inputs common constraints appearing in different contexts. We conduct a study in the specific context of Malawi, using ethnographic interviewing to draw out possible decision criteria and machine learning to identify their explanatory power. This study is structured to inform the question: "How do farmers decide to adopt the specific activities of CA in Malawi?" We find that more than any other factor, adoption by neighbors (i.e., peer effects) matters, with possible implications for the overall cost of encouraging CA (e.g., through subsidies) as it is taken up across a landscape. Further, we note that little else within our household survey (save for more detailed articulation of neighbor and neighborhood characteristics) offers greater explanatory power than those factors identified by farmers themselves. Finally, we note that decisions made in the presence of an incentive are structurally different than those made without incentives, validating previous concerns in the literature regarding the basis most CA adoption studies, within CA promotion interventions.

    AB - Adoption of the trinity of practices known commonly today as conservation agriculture (CA)-maintaining soil cover, reducing tillage, and enhancing soil nitrogen through legumes-is a critical process to the management of erosion in rural landscapes, and maintenance of aquatic habitats and hydropower potential. However, the large literature on the benefits and risks of CA fails to find any universal determinants of adoption, with competing uses for crop residues, availability of labor, and access to physical inputs common constraints appearing in different contexts. We conduct a study in the specific context of Malawi, using ethnographic interviewing to draw out possible decision criteria and machine learning to identify their explanatory power. This study is structured to inform the question: "How do farmers decide to adopt the specific activities of CA in Malawi?" We find that more than any other factor, adoption by neighbors (i.e., peer effects) matters, with possible implications for the overall cost of encouraging CA (e.g., through subsidies) as it is taken up across a landscape. Further, we note that little else within our household survey (save for more detailed articulation of neighbor and neighborhood characteristics) offers greater explanatory power than those factors identified by farmers themselves. Finally, we note that decisions made in the presence of an incentive are structurally different than those made without incentives, validating previous concerns in the literature regarding the basis most CA adoption studies, within CA promotion interventions.

    KW - Conservation agriculture

    KW - Decision tree modeling

    KW - Malawi

    KW - Peer effects

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85040779273&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85040779273&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    U2 - 10.3390/w10010051

    DO - 10.3390/w10010051

    M3 - Article

    AN - SCOPUS:85040779273

    VL - 10

    JO - Water (Switzerland)

    JF - Water (Switzerland)

    SN - 2073-4441

    IS - 1

    M1 - 51

    ER -