[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sag/seajad/v13y2016i2p55-74.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Yield and Income Effects of Ecologically-based Rodent Management in Mekong River Delta, Vietnam

Author

Listed:
  • Ho Ngoc Ninh

    (Lecturer, Faculty of Economics and Rural Development, Vietnam National University of Agriculture, Trau Quy, Gia Lam, Hanoi City, Vietnam)

  • Corazon T. Aragon

    (Retired Professor, Department of Agricultural Economics, College of Economics and Management, University of the Philippines Los Baños, Laguna 4031, Philippines)

  • Florencia G. Palis

    (Professor, Department of Social Sciences, University of the Philippines Los Baños, Laguna 4031, Philippines)

  • Roderick M. Rejesus

    (Associate Professor, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695-8109)

  • Grant R. Singleton

    (Scientist, International Rice Research Institute, DAPO Box 7777, Metro Manila, Philippines)

Abstract
Regression-based strategies along with propensity score matching (PSM) were used to assess the farm-level economic impact of community action (CA) strategies associated with ecologically based rodent management (EBRM). The paddy yield and real net income of rice farmer beneficiaries of the EBRM approach in An Giang Province, Mekong River Delta, Vietnam, were analyzed using panel data from 151 rice farmers. PSM along with the difference-indifference framework using the fixed-effect approach were found to be the most appropriate methods to evaluate the farm-level economic impact of the adoption of the CA strategies. The EBRM through CA did not replace what the farmers were doing, but rather built on their practices and incorporated a scientific basis by encouraging farmers to work together at key times of a cropping season. In terms of labor use for rodent control, CA only entailed an additional 0.3 man-days/ha for every CA. Normally, for a 40-hectare (ha) rice field, around 30 persons participated in each CA including men, women, and children. With two to three times done in a season, a total of 1 man-day/ha is as an additional labor for the whole season. The adoption of the EBRM through CA had a significant and positive impact on paddy yield and real net income of rice farmers. The mean paddy yield increased by 0.43-0.45 ton per ha and real net income of the beneficiaries increased by VND1.16–1.19 million/ha (approximately USD65-67/ha). These findings imply that the adoption of the CA strategies in rodent pest management as part of EBRM may not only have partly contributed to food security and increased household income of the rice farmer-beneficiaries but also to environmental improvement in these communities.

Suggested Citation

  • Ho Ngoc Ninh & Corazon T. Aragon & Florencia G. Palis & Roderick M. Rejesus & Grant R. Singleton, 2016. "Yield and Income Effects of Ecologically-based Rodent Management in Mekong River Delta, Vietnam," Asian Journal of Agriculture and Development, Southeast Asian Regional Center for Graduate Study and Research in Agriculture (SEARCA), vol. 13(2), pages 55-74, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:sag:seajad:v:13:y:2016:i:2:p:55-74
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ajad.searca.org/article?p=606
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Singleton, Grant R. & Hinds, Lyn A. & Leirs, Herwig & Zhang, Zhi-Bin (ed.), 1999. "Ecologically-Based Management of Rodent Pests," Monographs, Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research, number 114821.
    2. A. Smith, Jeffrey & E. Todd, Petra, 2005. "Does matching overcome LaLonde's critique of nonexperimental estimators?," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 125(1-2), pages 305-353.
    3. Barbara Sianesi, 2001. "Propensity score matching," United Kingdom Stata Users' Group Meetings 2001 12, Stata Users Group, revised 23 Aug 2001.
    4. Rodriguez, Divina Gracia P. & Rejesus, Roderick M. & Aragon, Corazono T., 2007. "Impacts of an Agricultural Development Program for Poor Coconut Producers in the Philippines: An Approach Using Panel Data and Propensity Score Matching Techniques," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 32(3), pages 1-24, December.
    5. Sascha O. Becker & Andrea Ichino, 2002. "Estimation of average treatment effects based on propensity scores," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 2(4), pages 358-377, November.
    6. Singleton, Grant, 2003. "Impacts of Rodents on Rice Production in Asia," IRRI Discussion Papers 287607, International Rice Research Institute (IRRI).
    7. Singleton, Grant R. & Petch, David A., 1994. "A Review of the Biology and Management of Rodent Pests in Southeast Asia," Technical Reports 113901, Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Andrea Pufahl & Christoph R. Weiss, 2009. "Evaluating the effects of farm programmes: results from propensity score matching," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 36(1), pages 79-101, March.
    2. Guido W. Imbens & Jeffrey M. Wooldridge, 2009. "Recent Developments in the Econometrics of Program Evaluation," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(1), pages 5-86, March.
    3. Richard Blundell & Monica Costa Dias, 2009. "Alternative Approaches to Evaluation in Empirical Microeconomics," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 44(3).
    4. Tommaso Nannicini, 2007. "Simulation-based sensitivity analysis for matching estimators," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 7(3), pages 334-350, September.
    5. Boris Bravo-Ureta & William Greene & Daniel Solís, 2012. "Technical efficiency analysis correcting for biases from observed and unobserved variables: an application to a natural resource management project," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 43(1), pages 55-72, August.
    6. Rodriguez, Divina Gracia P. & Rejesus, Roderick M. & Aragon, Corazono T., 2007. "Impacts of an Agricultural Development Program for Poor Coconut Producers in the Philippines: An Approach Using Panel Data and Propensity Score Matching Techniques," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 32(3), pages 1-24, December.
    7. Eliana V. Jimenez & Richard P.C. Brown, 2008. "Assessing the poverty impacts of remittances with alternative counterfactual income estimates," Discussion Papers Series 375, School of Economics, University of Queensland, Australia.
    8. Meyer, Stefan & Santos, Paulo & Kousonsavath, Chitpasong, 2022. "Using contests to promote coordinated control of invasive species: An experimental evaluation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    9. Olper, Alessandro & Falkowski, Jan & Swinnen, Johan F.M., 2009. "Democracy and Agricultural Protection: Parametric and Semi-parametric Matching Estimates," 2009 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, 2009, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 49313, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    10. repec:lic:licosd:25109 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Essama-Nssah, B., 2006. "Propensity score matching and policy impact analysis - a demonstration in EViews," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3877, The World Bank.
    12. Asad K. Ghalib & Issam Malki & Katsushi S. Imai, 2012. "Microfinance and its role in household poverty reduction: findings from Pakistan," Global Development Institute Working Paper Series 17312, GDI, The University of Manchester.
    13. Cédric Afsa & Pauline Givord, 2009. "Le rôle des conditions de travail dans les absences pour maladie : le cas des horaires irréguliers," Économie et Prévision, Programme National Persée, vol. 187(1), pages 83-103.
    14. Sascha O. Becker & Marco Caliendo, 2007. "Sensitivity analysis for average treatment effects," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 7(1), pages 71-83, February.
    15. Ramírez-Álvarez, Aurora Alejandra, 2019. "Land titling and its effect on the allocation of public goods: Evidence from Mexico," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 1-1.
    16. Tymon Słoczyński, 2015. "The Oaxaca–Blinder Unexplained Component as a Treatment Effects Estimator," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 77(4), pages 588-604, August.
    17. Victor Lavy & Analia Schlosser, 2005. "Targeted Remedial Education for Underperforming Teenagers: Costs and Benefits," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 23(4), pages 839-874, October.
    18. Marisa Coetzee, 2013. "Finding the Benefits: Estimating the Impact of The South African Child Support Grant," South African Journal of Economics, Economic Society of South Africa, vol. 81(3), pages 427-450, September.
    19. Santosh Kumar & Ganesh Rauniyar, 2018. "The impact of rural electrification on income and education: Evidence from Bhutan," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(3), pages 1146-1165, August.
    20. Browning, Martin & Crossley, Thomas F., 2008. "The long-run cost of job loss as measured by consumption changes," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 145(1-2), pages 109-120, July.
    21. Dettmann, Eva & Becker, Claudia & Schmeißer, Christian, 2010. "Is there a Superior Distance Function for Matching in Small Samples?," IWH Discussion Papers 3/2010, Halle Institute for Economic Research (IWH).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Impact evaluation; EBRM; difference-in-difference; PSM; rice farmers;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q1 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sag:seajad:v:13:y:2016:i:2:p:55-74. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Benedict A. Juliano (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/searcph.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.