The DOI matches its Crossref record; 57 of the 57 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Is farmer-to-farmer extension effective? The impact of training on technology adoption and rice farming productivity in Tanzania
Open accessAbstract
Agricultural training is a potentially effective method to diffuse relevant new technologies to increase productivity and alleviate rural poverty in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). However, since it is prohibitively expensive to provide direct training to all the farmers in SSA, it is critically important to examine the extent to which technologies taught to a small number of farmers disseminate to non-trained farmers. This paper investigates the technology dissemination pathways among smallholder rice producers within a rural irrigation scheme in Tanzania. As an innovative feature, we compare the performance of three categories of farmers: key farmers, who receive intensive pre-season training at a local training center; intermediate farmers, who are trained by the key farmers; and other ordinary farmers. By collecting and analyzing a unique five-year household-level panel data set, we estimate difference-in-differences models to assess how the gap in performance evolve as the technologies spill over from the trained farmers to the ordinary farmers. To disentangle the technology spillover process, we also examine the extent to which social and geographical network with the key and intermediate farmers influences the adoption of technologies by the ordinary farmers, by incorporating social relationship variables into spatial econometric models. We found that the ordinary farmers who were a relative or residential neighbor of a key or intermediate farmer were more likely to adopt new technologies than those who were not. As a result, while the key farmers’ technology adoption rates rose immediately after the training, those of the non-trained ordinary farmers caught up belatedly. As the technologies disseminated, the paddy yield of the key farmers increased from 3.1 to 5.3 tons per hectare, while the yield of the ordinary farmers increased from 2.6 to 3.7 tons per hectare. Our results suggest the effectiveness and practical potential of farmer-to-farmer extension programs for smallholders in SSA as a cost effective alternative to the conventional farmer training approach.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects
ROSENBAUM, P. R., & RUBIN, D. B. (1983) · Biometrika · doi:10.1093/biomet/70.1.41 · Cited by 31,241
How Much Should We Trust Differences-in-Differences Estimates?
Bertrand, M., Duflo, E., & Mullainathan, S. (2004) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.1162/003355304772839588 · Cited by 10,641
SOME PRACTICAL GUIDANCE FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF PROPENSITY SCORE MATCHING
Caliendo, M., & Kopeinig, S. (2008) · Journal of Economic Surveys · doi:10.1111/j.1467-6419.2007.00527.x · Cited by 6,238
Identification of Endogenous Social Effects: The Reflection Problem
Manski, C. F. (1993) · The Review of Economic Studies · doi:10.2307/2298123 · Cited by 6,209
Matching as an econometric evaluation estimator: Evidence from evaluating a job training programme
Heckman, J. J., Ichimura, H., & Todd, P. E. (1997) · The Review of Economic Studies · doi:10.2307/2971733 · Cited by 5,486
Introduction to Spatial Econometrics
LeSage, J., & Pace, R. K. (2009) · Chapman & Hall/CRC eBooks · doi:10.1201/9781420064254 · Cited by 5,420
Adoption of Agricultural Innovations in Developing Countries: A Survey
Feder, G., Just, R. E., & Zilberman, D. (1985) · Economic Development and Cultural Change · doi:10.1086/451461 · Cited by 3,482
An Introduction to Spatial Econometrics
LeSage, J. P. (2008) · Revue d'économie industrielle · doi:10.4000/rei.3887 · Cited by 2,998
Rosenbaum, P. R. (2002) · Springer Series in Statistics · doi:10.1007/978-1-4757-3692-2 · Cited by 2,394
Efficient Estimation of Average Treatment Effects Using the Estimated Propensity Score
Hirano, K., Imbens, G. W., & Ridder, G. (2003) · Econometrica · doi:10.1111/1468-0262.00442 · Cited by 2,355
Cited by
Takahashi, K., Muraoka, R., & Otsuka, K. (2020) · Agricultural Economics · doi:10.1111/agec.12539 · Cited by 444
A scalable scheme to implement data-driven agriculture for small-scale farmers
Jiménez, D., Delerce, S., Dorado, H., Cock, J., Muñoz, L. A., Agamez, A., & Jarvis, A. (2019) · Global Food Security · doi:10.1016/j.gfs.2019.08.004 · Cited by 47
Peer learning and technology adoption in a digital farmer-to-farmer network
Lasdun, V., Harou, A. P., Magomba, C., & Guereña, D. (2025) · Journal of Development Economics · doi:10.1016/j.jdeveco.2025.103496 · Cited by 23
Metadata
- Authors
- Nakano, Y., Tsusaka, T. W., Aida, T., & Pede, V. O.
- Venue
- World Development
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2018-05
- Volume
- 105
- Pages
- 336-351
- ISSN
- 0305-750X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2781601264
- Cited by
- 305
- References
- 57
- FWCI
- 50.79
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.