TY - JOUR
T1 - Can Peers Improve Agricultural Revenue?
AU - Songsermsawas, Tisorn
AU - Baylis, Kathy
AU - Chhatre, Ashwini
AU - Michelson, Hope
N1 - Funding Information:
This research is funded by the ADM Institute for the Prevention of Postharvest Loss, University of Illinois . The authors thank the editor and two anonymous referees for insightful comments and suggestions. We are also grateful to Mary Arends-Kuenning, Benjamin Crost, Alessandra Garbero, Phil Garcia, Barrett Kirwan, Xin Li, Mindy Mallory, Carl Nelson, Atul Nepal, Alex Winter-Nelson, and David Zilberman for generous comments on earlier drafts. Satya Prasanna provided excellent help with data. We thank the seminar participants at the 2014 AAEA/EAAE/CAES Joint Symposium in Montreal, the 2014 AAEA Meeting in Minneapolis and the 2014 NEUDC Conference in Boston for useful comments and suggestions. All remaining errors are our own.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2016 Elsevier Ltd.
Copyright:
Copyright 2016 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2016/7/1
Y1 - 2016/7/1
N2 - Crop revenues vary greatly among farmers and the source of that variation is not fully understood, even after controlling for factors including input use, technology adoption, and other agro-climatic factors. One hypothesis that may explain the variation in outcomes among farmers is differential access to information through peers. Using a household survey from India containing detailed information about personal relationships, we estimate peer effects on cash crop revenue using a novel spatial econometric technique to control for reflection. Our results show that 60% of farmers' revenue is explained by peers. Peer effects are particularly large in pesticide use and in the cultivation of a new crop. However, peer effects in input expenditures and land allocation cannot fully explain the variation in revenue, implying peers may also associate with management, negotiation, and marketing. We find that peer effects are significant among farmers' self-reported peers, especially among those peers who are farmers' main advisors for agricultural matters. Although caste-based networks (both within the same and in adjacent villages) are important, their effect is smaller than that of self-reported peer networks. We empirically rule out that our effects are driven by other factors such as geographically correlated unobservables, farmers following a lead farmer or economies of scale. Our findings speak to both the potential and the limitations of peers as sources of agricultural information, and highlight the need for future research about how to best integrate peers into agricultural extension.
AB - Crop revenues vary greatly among farmers and the source of that variation is not fully understood, even after controlling for factors including input use, technology adoption, and other agro-climatic factors. One hypothesis that may explain the variation in outcomes among farmers is differential access to information through peers. Using a household survey from India containing detailed information about personal relationships, we estimate peer effects on cash crop revenue using a novel spatial econometric technique to control for reflection. Our results show that 60% of farmers' revenue is explained by peers. Peer effects are particularly large in pesticide use and in the cultivation of a new crop. However, peer effects in input expenditures and land allocation cannot fully explain the variation in revenue, implying peers may also associate with management, negotiation, and marketing. We find that peer effects are significant among farmers' self-reported peers, especially among those peers who are farmers' main advisors for agricultural matters. Although caste-based networks (both within the same and in adjacent villages) are important, their effect is smaller than that of self-reported peer networks. We empirically rule out that our effects are driven by other factors such as geographically correlated unobservables, farmers following a lead farmer or economies of scale. Our findings speak to both the potential and the limitations of peers as sources of agricultural information, and highlight the need for future research about how to best integrate peers into agricultural extension.
KW - Crop revenue
KW - India
KW - Peer effects
KW - Social networks
KW - South Asia
KW - Spatial econometrics
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84962671156&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84962671156&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.worlddev.2016.01.023
DO - 10.1016/j.worlddev.2016.01.023
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:84962671156
SN - 0305-750X
VL - 83
SP - 163
EP - 178
JO - World Development
JF - World Development
ER -