Skip to main content

Food security impacts of smallholder farmers’ adoption of dual-purpose sweetpotato varieties in Rwanda

Food Security volume 13, pages 653–668 (2021)Cite this article

Abstract

Many empirical studies have recognized the importance of using improved crop varieties to tackle the challenges of low productivity, poverty, hunger, and food insecurity. Nevertheless, the size of the effect of any crop variety, such as dual-purpose sweetpotatoes developed for both food and animal feed, adopted by the target groups remains an empiric concern. Therefore, this study aimed to identify the determinants of adoption of dual-purpose sweetpotato varieties and, subsequently, estimate the extent to which adoption impacts household food security status. To establish causation, we used an endogenous switching probit to reduce the selection bias resulting from both observed and unobserved characteristics. The results of the adoption analysis indicate a low level of adoption (42%), and factors such as sex of the respondent, primary occupation, farm size, membership of social group, and a visit to farm demonstrations play significant roles in shaping farmers’ decision to adopt the dual-purpose sweetpotato varieties. Furthermore, the findings indicate that food insecurity continues among rural farming households, although a large proportion (63%) experiences mild food insecurity to food security. Generally, the adoption of dual-purpose sweetpotato has a positive impact on food security of the adopters, and the non-adopters would have benefited substantially from adoption if they had adopted. Thus, sweetpotato being a staple crop in Rwanda has a strong effect on the households’ food security status. Therefore, it implies the need to pursue efforts to intensify the growth of dual-purpose sweetpotato by poor rural households facing the dual problem of access and nutrition for food security and not having the means to afford food supplements.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Price includes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Data availability

Data is available upon request from the corresponding author.

Notes

  1. African Centre for Crop Improvement (ACCI) was set up at University of KwaZulu-Natal (UKZN), South Africa in 2002 to be the first centre based in Africa to train local plant breeders. These scientists trained by ACCI have worked on a broad array of crops – primarily root and tubers, cereals, and legumes, which are critical for food security and poverty reduction in Africa. ACCI has produced over 120 PhD graduates who are now scientists in various fields of plant sciences, particularly as researchers in research centres and academic institutions in Africa.

  2. It is important to note here that the three sets of binary food security outcomes are estimated separately, each with the adoption variable as treatment.

  3. Readers can refer to Lokshin and Sajaia (2011)

  4. The falsification test for the food security, moderately food insecurity and severe food insecurity are; Chi2 (2) = 1.27 (0.531), Chi2 (2) = 0.53 (0.767) and Chi2 (2) = 2.29 (0.319), respectively. The Chi2 probabilities are figures in parentheses.

  5. It must be noted that in each household, the sweetpotato farm manager was interviewed instead of the household head. In a situation where the household head is also the farm manager, then he or she is interview as such. Also, women were usually invited to answer the questions regarding the food security status of the household since they are considered as the administrators of the household, especially on food.

  6. Diffusion areas are districts where the dual-purpose sweetpotato varieties were disseminated and promoted while the non-diffusion or control areas are areas where the varieties were not promoted.

  7. CARI is an approach that combines a suite of food security indicators, including food consumption score and food expenditure share and livelihood coping strategies into a summary indicator known as the Food Security Index (FSI).

References

  • Adam, R.I. (2013). The dynamics and sustainability of production and distribution of sweet potato planting materials among small holder farmers in the Lake Victoria region, Tanzania. Ph.D. dissertation, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania. 371 p.

  • Adam, R. I., Sindi, K., & Badstue, L. (2015). Farmers’ knowledge, perceptions and management of diseases affecting sweet potatoes in the Lake Victoria zone region, Tanzania. Crop Protection, 72, 97–107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Adegbola, P., & Gardebroek, C. (2007). The effect of information sources on technology adoption and modification decisions. Agricultural Economics, 37(1), 55–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alene, A. D., & Manyong, V. M. (2006). Endogenous technology adoption and household food security: the case of improved cowpea varieties in northern Nigeria. Quarterly Journalof International Agriculture, 45(3), 211–230.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ali, D. A., Deininger, K., & Duponchel, M. (2014). Credit constraints and agricultural productivity: evidence from rural Rwanda. Journal of Development Studies, 50, 649–665.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ayuya, O. I., Gido, E. O., Bett, H. K., Lagat, J. K., Kahi, A. K., & Bauer, S. (2016). Effects ofcertified organic production systems on poverty among smallholder farmers: empirical evidence from Kenya. World Development, 67, 27–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bello, O. L., Baiyegunhi, L. J. S., & Danso-Abbeam, G. (2020). Productivity impact of improved rice varieties' adoption: Case of smallholder rice farmers in Nigeria. Economics of Innovation and New Technology., 1–17.

  • Coates, J., & Maxwell, D. (2012). Reaching for the stars? Universal measures of household food security. In FAO International Scientific Symposium on Food Security and Nutrition Measurement. 2012. http://www.fao.org/docrep/017/i3244e/i3244e.pdf. Assessed 17 Nov 2019.

  • Dagunga, G., Ehiakpor, D. S., Parry, I. K., & Danso-Abbeam, G. (2018). Determinants ofincome diversification among maize farm households in the Garu-Tempane District. Reviews of Agricultural and Applied Economics, 21(1), 55–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Danso-Abbeam, G., Antwi, J. B., Ehiakpor, D. S., & Mabe, F. N. (2017). Adoption of improved maize varieties among farm households in the northern region of Ghana. Cogent Economics and Finance, 5, 1416896.

    Google Scholar 

  • Danso-Abbeam, G., Dagunga, G., & Ehiakpor, D. S. (2019). Adoption of Zai technology for soil fertility management: evidence from the upper east region, Ghana. Journal of Economic Structures, 8, 32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Di Falco, S., & Bulte, E. (2013). The impact of kinship networks on the adoption of risk-mitigating strategies in Ethiopia. World Development, 43, 100–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • Di Falco, S., Veronesi, M., & Yesuf, M. (2011). Does adaptation to climate change provide food security? A micro-perspective from Ethiopia. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 93(3), 829–846.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diiro, G. (2013). Impact of off-farm income on agricultural technology adoption intensity and productivity: Evidence from rural maize farmers in Uganda. In Uganda support Programme, IFPRI working papers. Uganda: International Food Policy Research Institute.

  • Djokoto, J. G., & Afari-Sefa, V. (2017). Alternative functional forms for technology choice: application to cocoa production technologies. Technology in Society, 50, 110–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • FAO. (2013). International scientific symposium on food and nutrition security information: from valid measurement to effective decision making. http://www.fao.org/docrep/017/i3244e/i3244e.pdf. Assessed 17 Nov 2019.

  • FAO, IFAD, UNICEF, WFP and WHO. (2018). The state of food security and nutrition in the world 2018. Building climate resilience for food security and nutrition. FAO: Rome.

    Google Scholar 

  • Issahaku, G., & Abdul-Rahman, A. (2018). Sustainable land management practices, off-farmwork participation, and vulnerability among farmers in Ghana. Is there a nexus? International soil and water conservation research, 7, 18–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kassie, M., Jaleta, M., Shiferaw, B., Mmbando, F., & Mekuria, M. (2013). Adoption of interrelated sustainable agricultural practices in smallholder systems: evidence from rural Tanzania. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 80(3), 525–540.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kassie, M., Jaleta, M., & Mattei, A. (2014). Evaluating the impact of improved maize varieties on food security in rural Tanzania: evidence from a continuous treatment approach. Food Security, 6, 217–230.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kassie, M., Teklewold, H., Jaleta, M., Marenya, P., & Erenstein, O. (2015). Understanding the adoption of a portfolio of sustainable intensification practices in eastern and southern Africa. Land Use Policy, 42, 400–411.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khan, A., Pervaiz, U., Khan, N., Ahmad, S., & Nigar, S. (2009). Effectiveness of demonstration on plots as extension method adopted by AKRSP for agricultural technology dissemination in district Chitral. Sarhad Journal of Agriculture, 25(2), 313–319.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khonje, M. J., Manda, J., Mkandawire, P., Tufa, A. H., & Alene, A. D. (2018). Adoption and impact of multiple agricultural technologies: evidence from eastern Zambia. Agricultural Economics, 49, 599–609.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kondylis, F., & Mueller, V. (2013), Seeing is believing? Evidence from a demonstration plot experiment in Mozambique, Mozambique strategy support program working paper no.1, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), Washington, DC.

  • Kunstashula, E., Chabala, L. M., & Mulenga, B. P. (2014). Impact of minimum tillage and crop rotation as climate change adaptation strategies on farmer welfare in smallholderfarming systems of Zambia. Journal of Sustainable Development, 7(4), 95–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lokshin, M., & Sajaia, Z. (2011). Impact of interventions on discrete outcomes: maximum likelihood estimation of the binary choice models with binary endogenous regressors. The Stata Journal, 11(3), 368–385.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ma, W., Abdulai, A., & Ma, C. (2017). The effects of off-farm work on fertilizer and pesticide expenditures in China. Review of Development Economics, 1–19.

  • Makate, C., Wang, R., Makate, M., & Mango, N. (2017). Impact of drought tolerant maize adoption on maize productivity, sales and consumption in rural Zimbabwe. Agrekon, 56(1), 67–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manda, J., Gardebroek, C., Kuntashula, E., & Alene, A. D. (2018). Impact of improved varieties on food security in eastern Zambia: a doubly robust analysis. Review of Development Economics, 22, 1709–1728.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martey, E., Etwire, P. M., & Kuwornu, J. K. M. (2020). Economic impacts of smallholder farmers’ adoption of drought-tolerant maize varieties. Land Use Policy, 90, 104524.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mason, J. (2002). Keynote paper: Measuring hunger and malnutrition. Orleans: Tulane University Louisiana.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maxwell, D., Coates, J., & Vaitla, B. (2013). How do different indicators of household food securitycompare? Empirical evidence from Tigray. Medford: Feinstein International Centre, Tufts University.

    Google Scholar 

  • MIGEPROF (2010). Ministry of Gender and Family Promotion, National Gender Policy. Final version. https://www.ilo.org/dyn/natlex/docs/ELECTRONIC/94009/110188/F-1576743982/RWA-94009.pdf. Accessed 2 Sept 2020.

  • MINAGRI (2013). Strategic plan for the transformation of agriculture in Rwanda. Phase III http://www.minagri.gov.rw/fileadmin/user_upload/documents/PoliciesStrategy/PSTA_III.pdf

  • Mmbando, F. E., & Baiyegunhi, L. J. S. (2016). Socio-economic and institutional factorsinfluencing adoption of improved maize varieties in Hai District, Tanzania. Journal of Human Ecology, 53(1), 49–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nata, J. T., Mjelde, J. W., & Boadu, F. O. (2014). Household adoption of soil-improving practices and food insecurity in Ghana. Agriculture and Food Security, 3(17), 17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ndabeni, L. (2019). Innovation and the dynamics of rural economic development. In P. T. Jacobs (Ed.), Equitable rural socio-economic transitions (pp. 219–229). Cape Town: HSRC Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nguezet, P.M.D., Ainembabzi, J.H., Alene, A., Abdulaye, T., Feleke, S., Nziguheba, G., Khonje, M., Mignouna, D., Okafor, C., Njukwe, E., Asten, P.V., Mapatano, S., Vanlauwe, B and Manyong, V. (2019). Are farmers using cropping system technologies experiencing poverty reduction in the Great Lakes of Region of Africa? Food and Energy Security, 00:e205.

  • Ndagijimana, M., Kessler, A., & Asseldonk, M. V. (2018). Understanding farmers' investments in sustainable land management in Burundi: a case-study in the provinces of Gitega and Muyinga. Land Degradation and Development, 30, 417–425.

    Google Scholar 

  • NISR (2015). Integrated household living conditions survey Enquête Intégrale Sur les conditions de vie des Ménages. Rwanda poverty profile reports EICV 2014/2015. < Rwanda_Poverty_Profile_Report_0_0.pdf > Accessed 25 Oct 2019.

  • Nkegbe, P. K., Abu, B. M., & Issahaku, H. (2017). Food security in the Savannah accelerated development authority zone of Ghana: an ordered probit household hunger scale approach. Agriculture and Food Security, 6, 35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nwangi, M., & Kariuki, S. (2015). Factors determining the adoption of new agricultural technologies by smallholder farmers in developing countries. Journal of Economic, Sustainability and Development, 6(5), 208–216.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nyirahanganyamunsi, G. (2016). Sweet potato value chain in Rwanda: Understanding actors and interaction challenges in a context of food and livelihood security. A research paper for Master of Arts in Social Studies, International Institute of Social Studies, The Hague, The Netherlands.

  • Ogundari, K., & Bolarinwa, O. (2018). Impact of agricultural innovation adoption: a meta-analysis. Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics., 59, 1–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Powley, E. (2005). Women in parliament: Beyond numbers; International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance Stockholm, Sweden, 2005. A Revised Edition, pp. 265.

  • Ramirez, M., Bernal, P., Clarke, I., & Hernandez, I. (2018). The role of social networks in the inclusion of small-scale producers in agri-food developing clusters. Food Policy, 77, 59–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Republic of Rwanda (2014). National Food and Nutrition Policy 2013–2018. http://extwprlegs1.fao.org/docs/pdf/rwa151338.pdf. Viewed 5/14/2019.

  • Rwanda CFSVA (2018). Comprehensive Food Security and Vulnerability Analysis (CFSVA). Available at http://www.wfp.org/food-security

  • Shiferaw, B., Kassie, M., Jaleta, M., & Yirga, C. (2014). Adoption of improved wheat varieties and impacts on household food security in Ethiopia. Food Policy, 44, 272–284.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shumbusha, D., Ndirigwe, J., Kankundiye, L., Anastasie, M., Gahakwa, D., Ndayemeye, P. S., & Mwanga, R. O. M. (2014). ‘RW11 – 17’, ‘RW11 – 1860’, ‘RW11 – 2419’, ‘RW11 – 2560’, ‘RW11 – 2910’, and ‘RW11 – 4923’ sweet potato. HortScience, 49(10), 1349–1352.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sinyolo, S. (2020). Technology adoption and household food security among rural households in South Africa. The role of improved maize varieties. Technology in Society, 60, 101214.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sisay, D., Jema, H., Degye, G., & Abdi-Khalil, E. (2015). Speed of improved maize seed adoption by smallholder farmers in southwestern Ethiopia: analysis using the count data models. Journal of Agricultural Economics, Extension and Rural Development, 3(5), 276–282.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spielman, D. J., Ekboir, J., & Davis, K. (2009). The art and science of innovation systems inquiry: applications to sub-Saharan African agriculture. Technology in Society, 31(4), 399–405.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tanellari, E., Kostandini, G., & Bonabana, J. (2013). Gender impacts on adoption of newtechnologies: Evidence from Uganda. Paper presented at the 2013 Southern agricultural economic association annual meeting, February 2–5, 2013, Orlando, Florida.

  • Teklewold, H., Kassie, M., & Shiferaw, B. (2013). Adoption of multiple sustainable agricultural practices in rural Ethiopia. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 64(3), 597–623.

    Google Scholar 

  • Triomphe, B., Floquet, A., Kamau, G., Letty, B., Vodouhe, S. D., Ng’ang’a, T., et al. (2013). What does an inventory of iecent innovation experiences tell us about agricultural innovation in Africa? Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension, 19(3), 311–324.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weatherspoon, D. D., Miller, S., Ngabitsinze, J. C., Weatherspoon, L. J., & Oehmke, J. K. (2019). Stunting, food security, markets, and food policy in Rwanda. Public Heath, 19, 882.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Bank (2001) South Africa – CGIAR Partnership Results in New Maize Varieties with 30 to 50 Percent Higher Yields, 2001. Available from: http://www.worldbank. org/html/cgiar/press/news010521.pdf

Download references

Funding

The study was funded by the Alliance for Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA) through the African Centre for Crop Improvement, University of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. African Centre for Crop Improvement, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Pietermaritzburg, South Africa

    Gideon Danso-Abbeam, Mark D. Laing & Hussein Shimelis

  2. Discipline of Agricultural Economics, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Pietermaritzburg, South Africa

    Gideon Danso-Abbeam & Lloyd J. S. Baiyegunhi

  3. Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University for Development Studies, Tamale, Ghana

    Gideon Danso-Abbeam

Authors
  1. Gideon Danso-Abbeam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lloyd J. S. Baiyegunhi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mark D. Laing
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Hussein Shimelis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gideon Danso-Abbeam.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interests.

Appendix

Appendix

Table 5 Food insecurity experience scale survey module
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Danso-Abbeam, G., Baiyegunhi, L.J.S., Laing, M.D. et al. Food security impacts of smallholder farmers’ adoption of dual-purpose sweetpotato varieties in Rwanda. Food Sec. 13, 653–668 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-020-01119-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-020-01119-7

Keywords

  • African centre for crop improvement
  • Food insecurity experience scale
  • Sweetpotato varieties
  • Endogenous switching probit
  • Rwanda