The DOI matches its Crossref record; 24 of the 24 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Gender Differences in Access to Extension Services and Agricultural Productivity
Open accessAbstract
Purpose:This article contributes new empirical evidence and nuanced analysis on the gender difference in access to extension services and how this translates to observed differences in technology adoption and agricultural productivity.Approach:It looks at the case of Ethiopia, where substantial investments in the extension system have been made, but the coverage and effect of these investments on female and male producers are not well-understood. This article employs a cross-sectional instrumental-variable regression method using a regionally representative data set of more than 7500 households in four major regions in Ethiopia during the 2010 main season.Findings:Female heads of households and plot-managers are less likely to get extension services through various channels and less likely to access quality services than their male counterparts after controlling for other factors. Receiving advice from extension agents is positively related to adoption of improved seed and fertiliser for both female and male, as hypothesised. However, beyond their influence through fertiliser and improved seed use, visits by or advice from agents are not significant or negatively significant in all productivity models estimated for females and males, which is in contrast to past studies. In some crop-productivity models estimated, it is the perceived quality of agents’ visits and access to radio that appear to be positively significant factors in explaining productivity levels for both females and males.Practical implications:Results highlight the need for stratified productivity models by gender and crop in future research. In terms of policy implication, results highlight the need to focus on quality of service and alternative channels of information, such as radio, to improve productivity.Originality/value:This article utilises a large-sample data set; uses the instrumental-variable regression method to address selection bias and endogeneity issues in productivity models; and stratifies the analyses to account for differentiated production functions by gender and crop.
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
(2001) · RePEc: Research Papers in Economics · Cited by 27,577
Stock, J. H., & Watson, M. W. (2002) · Cited by 1,980
Testing for Weak Instruments in Linear IV Regression
Stock, J., & Yogo, M. (2002) · doi:10.3386/t0284 · Cited by 1,842
A Guide to Modern Econometrics
Verbeek, M. (2000) · RePEc: Research Papers in Economics · Cited by 1,767
Nikolopoulos, K. (2004) · International Journal of Forecasting · doi:10.1016/j.ijforecast.2003.11.008 · Cited by 724
Doss, C. (2001) · Agricultural Economics · doi:10.1016/s0169-5150(00)00096-7 · Cited by 669
Dercon, S., Gilligan, D. O., Hoddinott, J., & Woldehanna, T. (2009) · American Journal of Agricultural Economics · doi:10.1111/j.1467-8276.2009.01325.x · Cited by 485
The Economic Impact of Agricultural Extension: A Review
Birkhaeuser, D., Evenson, R. E., & Feder, G. (1991) · Economic Development and Cultural Change · doi:10.1086/451893 · Cited by 469
Peterman, A., Behrman, J. A., & Quisumbing, A. R. (2014) · Gender in Agriculture · doi:10.1007/978-94-017-8616-4_7 · Cited by 403
A Meta-Analysis of Rates of Return to Agricultural R&D:Ex Pede Herculem?
(2000) · International Food Policy Research Institute eBooks · doi:10.2499/0896291162rr113 · Cited by 339
Cited by
Estimating the global potential of water harvesting from successful case studies
Piemontese, L., Castelli, G., Fetzer, I., Barron, J., Liniger, H., Harari, N., Bresci, E., & Jaramillo, F. (2020) · Global Environmental Change · doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2020.102121 · Cited by 69
Metadata
- Authors
- Ragasa, C., Berhane, G., Tadesse, F., & Taffesse, A. S.
- Venue
- The Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2013-10
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 437-468
- ISSN
- 1389-224X (ISSN-L)
- 1750-8622
- OpenAlex
- W2063514511
- Cited by
- 288
- References
- 24
- FWCI
- 31.94
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Gender Differences in Access to Extension Services and Agricultural Productivity. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/1389224x.2013.817343
- The paper
- Ragasa, C., Berhane, G., Tadesse, F., & Taffesse, A. S. (2013). Gender Differences in Access to Extension Services and Agricultural Productivity. The Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension. https://doi.org/10.1080/1389224x.2013.817343
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.