TY - JOUR
T1 - Conservation agriculture and climate resilience
AU - Michler, Jeffrey D.
AU - Baylis, Kathy
AU - Arends-Kuenning, Mary
AU - Mazvimavi, Kizito
N1 - Funding Information:
The authors owe a particular debt to Albert Chirima, Tarisayi Pedzisa, Alex Winter-Nelson, and Yujun Zhou. This work has benefited from helpful comments and criticism by Anna Josephson, David Rohrbach, David Spielman, and Christian Thierfelder as well as seminar participants at the CSAE conference in Oxford, the AERE conference in Pittsburgh, the AAAE conference in Addis Ababa, and the joint SPIA/PIM Conference on technology adoption and impact, in Nairobi. This research was supported by ISPC-SPIA under the grant “Strengthening Impact Assessment in the CGIAR System (SIAC)." We gratefully acknowledge financial support for the data collection from the United Kingdom Department for International Development (DFID) and United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) through the Protracted Relief Program (PRP) in Zimbabwe, 2007–2011. Neither the funders nor our implementation partners had any role in the analysis, writing of the paper, or decision to submit for publication.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 The Authors
PY - 2019/1
Y1 - 2019/1
N2 - Agricultural productivity growth is vital for economic and food security outcomes which are threatened by climate change. In response, governments and development agencies are encouraging the adoption of ‘climate-smart’ agricultural technologies, such as conservation agriculture (CA). However, there is little rigorous evidence that demonstrates the effect of CA on production or climate resilience, and what evidence exists is hampered by selection bias. Using panel data from Zimbabwe, we test how CA performs during extreme rainfall events - both shortfalls and surpluses. We control for the endogenous adoption decision and find that use of CA in years of average rainfall results in no yield gains, and in some cases yield loses. However, CA is effective in mitigating the negative impacts of deviations in rainfall. We conclude that the lower yields during normal rainfall seasons may be a proximate factor in low uptake of CA. Policy should focus promotion of CA on these climate resilience benefits.
AB - Agricultural productivity growth is vital for economic and food security outcomes which are threatened by climate change. In response, governments and development agencies are encouraging the adoption of ‘climate-smart’ agricultural technologies, such as conservation agriculture (CA). However, there is little rigorous evidence that demonstrates the effect of CA on production or climate resilience, and what evidence exists is hampered by selection bias. Using panel data from Zimbabwe, we test how CA performs during extreme rainfall events - both shortfalls and surpluses. We control for the endogenous adoption decision and find that use of CA in years of average rainfall results in no yield gains, and in some cases yield loses. However, CA is effective in mitigating the negative impacts of deviations in rainfall. We conclude that the lower yields during normal rainfall seasons may be a proximate factor in low uptake of CA. Policy should focus promotion of CA on these climate resilience benefits.
KW - Climate smart agriculture
KW - Conservation farming
KW - Technology adoption
KW - Weather risk
KW - Zimbabwe
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85058404999&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85058404999&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jeem.2018.11.008
DO - 10.1016/j.jeem.2018.11.008
M3 - Article
C2 - 30739962
AN - SCOPUS:85058404999
VL - 93
SP - 148
EP - 169
JO - Journal of Environmental Economics and Management
JF - Journal of Environmental Economics and Management
SN - 0095-0696
ER -