systems research - the IDRC Digital Library - International ...

systems research - the IDRC Digital Library - International ... systems research - the IDRC Digital Library - International ...

idl.bnc.idrc.ca
from idl.bnc.idrc.ca More from this publisher
14.07.2013 Views

Mungbean productivity The productivity of mungbean came mostly from pesticide application. Farmers were fully aware of the potential damage if insect pests were not controlled during the flowering stage of mungbean. Seeds did not significantly affect mungbean yield. Farmers had totally shifted to the new mungbean variety (MG-9) introduced by RIARS. Similarly, inputs, labor, and power tiller did not significantly affect mungbean yield. The intercept shifter (year dummy variable) indicated that mungbean yield in crop year 1989-90 was significantly higher than in the succeeding year. Impact on total household income The endogenous variable, total household income, represented the total earnings of the farm household from different sources. The explanatory variable, nonfarm income, was an arithmetic component of the endogenous variable in question; therefore, it was introduced in the model as a share of total income. Proxy variables, such as the number of hours spent on nonfarm economic activities, may be a more appropriate estimator. Different economic activities, however, yielded different levels of earnings. Total household income was explained by the technology variables (productivity in maize, rice, and mungbean, cropping intensities in lowland and upland areas of the farm, total land holdings, household size, and year dummy). Although productivity in rice and maize had a significant positive impact on total farm household income, mungbean contributed negatively (although the difference was not sta~istically significant). The significant negative effect of lowland cropping intensity compared with the positive impact of upland cropping intensity, reaffirmed the preference of the farmers to intensively cultivate their upland areas rather than their lowlands. Similarly, total land holdings provided a significant positive impact on total household income. Household size had a significant positive effect on total income. Larger families tended to have an edge in generating cash income for the household. As expected, the value of landlord shares decreased total income. This particular variable represents tenurial status of the land, or land rent in general. Most farmers cultivated several parcels of land with different rental arrangements. Weather affected overall crop production during the first year of the study; therefore, total farm household income was affected that year (the significant negative sign for the year dummy variable). Impact on adequacy of nutrient intake Adequacy in nutrient intake only considers the macronutrients (energy and protein). These macronutrients are still the most limiting in the diet of small farming households. The endogenous variables were calculated as a per capita intake instead

of the ratio of actual intake and reconlmended daily allowance (RDA) to ensure consistency in the use of the specified econometric model. Furthermore, the average adequacy in nutrients has yet to be satisfied. Per capita energy intake (calories) was determined by total household income, age and years of schooling of the mother, family size, and share of food expenditure of the total farm household budget. All exogenous variables had a significant positive impact on per capita energy intake. Characteristics of the mothers such as educational attainment, a proxy variable for a\i.areness of good diet preparation, and age, representing long-term experience on the part of the mother, both positively contributed to increases in energy intake. Per capita protein intake (grams) was also explained by these \,ariables. Total household income, expenditures on food. and characteristics of mothers had significant positi\.e impact on protein intake. The positi\.r effect of household size on energy and protein intake may indicate the capacity of the household to acquire enoush food. CONCLUSIOS If the explicit goal of FSR i~ to de\pelop a crop-nlis that incre~~ses producti\,ity of land ivhich can he translated into higher incomes. then its implicit goal is to impro\,e the total welfare of the fartning households. This study assessed the i~npact of FSR on this basis. The study indicated that there \vas a rnised imp;ict on the different \\.elfare measures of the fdrming households. It is probable that increases in rlourishnient \rere positiirely affected by the introduced technologies. The nutritional inipact of FSR technologies could be directl!! through an increase in household food supply as a result of an Increase in total production (represented by value of prod~rctivity in the model), or indirectly througli an increase in purchasing power as a result of increased total ho~15ehold incorne t7rought about by increased productivity. Changes in food supply, ho\i.e\:er, affect the n~.~tr~tional stat~~s of the household mernbers only to the extent that food consumption is affected. Altlioi~gh the technologies have a significant positive effect on per capita nutrient intake, the nutrient adequ;lcv indices suggest that houseliold intake still falls sliort of recli~ired daily nutrient intake. It appears, ho\\.ever, that sni;~ll farming households can hetter satisf! their protein requirement than their energy needs (other sti~dies have made similar observations). T\vo plausihle esplnnations ;ire offered: the m;li~i diet of Filipinos, is rice, which has a relatively high protein content; ;lnd Filipitios in gcner~ll. consume less fat. In the absence of baseline information, one can onl! ~pt~illtlte whe1l:er there was an increase in nutrient intake or \chetl~er tllat inr;~ke I-enl;iins ; ~t the sL\iTltl level as that of the preproject period. As R:lvillon (1990) h;~s pointed out, the nutritional imp:!ct of a~ricultural changes depends on whetlier or not the vulnerable groups u'ithin the ho~~sehold benefit from them. The prevalence of ~lnderno~lrishmeut among the preschoolers in all farm categories is noticeable. The nutritional st;ltus of the prrschoolers tends to follow seasonal fluctuations in the indices of nutrient adequacy. One limitation of the study is its inability to link direc.tly (at least within the specified econometric

Mungbean productivity<br />

The productivity of mungbean came mostly from pesticide application. Farmers<br />

were fully aware of <strong>the</strong> potential damage if insect pests were not controlled during<br />

<strong>the</strong> flowering stage of mungbean. Seeds did not significantly affect mungbean yield.<br />

Farmers had totally shifted to <strong>the</strong> new mungbean variety (MG-9) introduced by<br />

RIARS. Similarly, inputs, labor, and power tiller did not significantly affect<br />

mungbean yield. The intercept shifter (year dummy variable) indicated that<br />

mungbean yield in crop year 1989-90 was significantly higher than in <strong>the</strong> succeeding<br />

year.<br />

Impact on total household income<br />

The endogenous variable, total household income, represented <strong>the</strong> total earnings of<br />

<strong>the</strong> farm household from different sources. The explanatory variable, nonfarm<br />

income, was an arithmetic component of <strong>the</strong> endogenous variable in question;<br />

<strong>the</strong>refore, it was introduced in <strong>the</strong> model as a share of total income. Proxy variables,<br />

such as <strong>the</strong> number of hours spent on nonfarm economic activities, may be a more<br />

appropriate estimator. Different economic activities, however, yielded different<br />

levels of earnings. Total household income was explained by <strong>the</strong> technology<br />

variables (productivity in maize, rice, and mungbean, cropping intensities in lowland<br />

and upland areas of <strong>the</strong> farm, total land holdings, household size, and year dummy).<br />

Although productivity in rice and maize had a significant positive impact on total<br />

farm household income, mungbean contributed negatively (although <strong>the</strong> difference<br />

was not sta~istically significant).<br />

The significant negative effect of lowland cropping intensity compared with<br />

<strong>the</strong> positive impact of upland cropping intensity, reaffirmed <strong>the</strong> preference of <strong>the</strong><br />

farmers to intensively cultivate <strong>the</strong>ir upland areas ra<strong>the</strong>r than <strong>the</strong>ir lowlands.<br />

Similarly, total land holdings provided a significant positive impact on total<br />

household income.<br />

Household size had a significant positive effect on total income. Larger<br />

families tended to have an edge in generating cash income for <strong>the</strong> household. As<br />

expected, <strong>the</strong> value of landlord shares decreased total income. This particular<br />

variable represents tenurial status of <strong>the</strong> land, or land rent in general. Most farmers<br />

cultivated several parcels of land with different rental arrangements. Wea<strong>the</strong>r<br />

affected overall crop production during <strong>the</strong> first year of <strong>the</strong> study; <strong>the</strong>refore, total<br />

farm household income was affected that year (<strong>the</strong> significant negative sign for <strong>the</strong><br />

year dummy variable).<br />

Impact on adequacy of nutrient intake<br />

Adequacy in nutrient intake only considers <strong>the</strong> macronutrients (energy and protein).<br />

These macronutrients are still <strong>the</strong> most limiting in <strong>the</strong> diet of small farming<br />

households. The endogenous variables were calculated as a per capita intake instead

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!