Different strategies of crop diversification between poor and non-poor farmers: Concepts and evidence from Tanzania

IF 6.6 2区 经济学 Q1 ECOLOGY Ecological Economics Pub Date : 2024-09-13 DOI:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2024.108369
Takefumi Fujimoto , Aya Suzuki
{"title":"Different strategies of crop diversification between poor and non-poor farmers: Concepts and evidence from Tanzania","authors":"Takefumi Fujimoto ,&nbsp;Aya Suzuki","doi":"10.1016/j.ecolecon.2024.108369","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Crop diversification, or growing multiple crops in farmland, has received attention as a risk-reducing strategy for smallholders. This study attempts to show that poor and non-poor farmers adopt different strategies of crop diversification. We first conceptualize farmers’ heterogeneous motivations for crop diversification by introducing a subsistence constraint into a utility maximization problem under uncertainty. Using the Tanzanian National Panel Survey, we then examine whether past experiences of shocks affect the adoption of crop diversification differently between poor and non-poor farmers. We rely on a threshold model to estimate heterogeneous impacts between poor and non-poor farmers. We find that poor farmers adopt crop diversification for robust food securities in response to drought/flood and large increases in food prices for purchase. In contrast, non-poor farmers adopt crop diversification to stabilize market income in response to large increases in input prices and large declines in crop prices for sale.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51021,"journal":{"name":"Ecological Economics","volume":"227 ","pages":"Article 108369"},"PeriodicalIF":6.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800924002660/pdfft?md5=909c7c4f9779b145fb493e2244b64b93&pid=1-s2.0-S0921800924002660-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecological Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800924002660","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Crop diversification, or growing multiple crops in farmland, has received attention as a risk-reducing strategy for smallholders. This study attempts to show that poor and non-poor farmers adopt different strategies of crop diversification. We first conceptualize farmers’ heterogeneous motivations for crop diversification by introducing a subsistence constraint into a utility maximization problem under uncertainty. Using the Tanzanian National Panel Survey, we then examine whether past experiences of shocks affect the adoption of crop diversification differently between poor and non-poor farmers. We rely on a threshold model to estimate heterogeneous impacts between poor and non-poor farmers. We find that poor farmers adopt crop diversification for robust food securities in response to drought/flood and large increases in food prices for purchase. In contrast, non-poor farmers adopt crop diversification to stabilize market income in response to large increases in input prices and large declines in crop prices for sale.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
贫困农民和非贫困农民的不同作物多样化战略:坦桑尼亚的概念和证据
作物多样化,即在农田中种植多种作物,作为小农户的一种降低风险策略,已受到关注。本研究试图说明,贫困农民和非贫困农民采取了不同的作物多样化策略。我们首先通过在不确定条件下的效用最大化问题中引入生存约束,对农民进行作物多样化的异质性动机进行概念化。然后,我们利用坦桑尼亚全国面板调查,研究过去的冲击经历是否会对贫困农民和非贫困农民采用作物多样化产生不同影响。我们依靠门槛模型来估计贫困农民和非贫困农民之间的异质性影响。我们发现,在干旱/洪水和粮食价格大幅上涨的情况下,贫困农户会采用作物多样化来获得稳健的粮食保障。相反,非贫困农民则会在投入价格大幅上涨和作物销售价格大幅下跌时采用作物多样化来稳定市场收入。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Ecological Economics
Ecological Economics 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
12.00
自引率
5.70%
发文量
313
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: Ecological Economics is concerned with extending and integrating the understanding of the interfaces and interplay between "nature''s household" (ecosystems) and "humanity''s household" (the economy). Ecological economics is an interdisciplinary field defined by a set of concrete problems or challenges related to governing economic activity in a way that promotes human well-being, sustainability, and justice. The journal thus emphasizes critical work that draws on and integrates elements of ecological science, economics, and the analysis of values, behaviors, cultural practices, institutional structures, and societal dynamics. The journal is transdisciplinary in spirit and methodologically open, drawing on the insights offered by a variety of intellectual traditions, and appealing to a diverse readership. Specific research areas covered include: valuation of natural resources, sustainable agriculture and development, ecologically integrated technology, integrated ecologic-economic modelling at scales from local to regional to global, implications of thermodynamics for economics and ecology, renewable resource management and conservation, critical assessments of the basic assumptions underlying current economic and ecological paradigms and the implications of alternative assumptions, economic and ecological consequences of genetically engineered organisms, and gene pool inventory and management, alternative principles for valuing natural wealth, integrating natural resources and environmental services into national income and wealth accounts, methods of implementing efficient environmental policies, case studies of economic-ecologic conflict or harmony, etc. New issues in this area are rapidly emerging and will find a ready forum in Ecological Economics.
期刊最新文献
Effect simulation and local adaptation of multi-agent collaborative governance in marine eco-economic systems: Evidence from China Carbon Giants: Exploring the Top 100 Industrial CO2 Emitters in the EU Public support for degrowth policies and sufficiency behaviours in the United States: A discrete choice experiment Social comparison nudges: What actually happens when we are told what others do? Breaking the bag habit: Testing interventions to reduce plastic bag demand
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1