Africa RISING Baseline Survey Data

Summary—Ghana and Mali

Apurba Shee, IFPRI

Africa RISING West Africa Project Annual Review and

Planning Meeting, Accra, Ghana, 24-25 March 2015

Ghana AR baseline survey data summary

Mali AR baseline survey data summary

Typology

Project Mapping and Monitoring Tool (PMMT)

Concluding comments

Outline

Ghana baseline survey data

3

Sampling design- Four groups of households are surveyed: AR beneficiaries in 2013, AR beneficiaries in 2014, AR non-beneficiaries in treatment sites, and non-beneficiaries in control sites

Summary of baseline results

All

Ar2013 Ar2014 Arnb Control Sample

Region

Northern Region 187 61 67 300 615

Upper East Region 107 33 42 40 222

Upper West Region 160 54 73 160 447

Total 454 148 182 500 1,284

Sample size and distribution of households

Due to revised administrative classification of districts just before data collection, 4 control communities fall under northern region instead on Upper East region

Yield for five main crops

787

536

1011

277

526

817.69

434.46

1,066.60

258.62

440

767

588

1076

285

536

823

748

917

286

529

MAIZE GROUNDNUT RICE BEAN PEARL MILLET

Yield for main crops in kg/ha

AR2013 AR2014 ARNB Control

Except maize and groundnut AR beneficiaries seem to have higher productivity compared to control households

Component share of harvest for average of four main crops (maize, rice, groundnut, bean)

1%1%12%

9%

48%

28%

1%

Harvest Share for Control Households

Animal feed

Crop residue

Seeds

Exchange

Own consumption

Sale

Other uses

1%1%13%

7%

53%

25%

0%

Harvest Share for AR Households

Animal feed

Crop residue

Seeds

Exchange

Own consumption

Sale

Other uses

AR households tend to sell less and consume more

Average number of livestock owned by household

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

18.0

Cattle Equines Goats Pigs Chicken Other animal

Average livestock holding per household

AR2013 AR2014 ARNB Control

AR beneficiary households tend to raise more livestock than control households

Feeding practices- percentage of households

12%

0%

82%

5%

1%

0%

Large ruminants feed

Crop residue

Green forages

Grazing/open air

Legumes, fodder trees

Multiple

Other

17%

2%

61%

2%7%

7% 4%

Chicken and poultry feed

Crop residue

Green forages

Grazing/open air

Concentrate feeds

Legumes, fodder trees

Multiple

Other

Grazing/open air is the main feeding practice followed by crop residue

Economic

Human

EnvironmentalSocial

Productivity

-.25

0

.25

.5

Beneficiary Exposed in 2014

Non-Beneficiary Control

Northern Region

Ranking of HH among 5 dimensions: Beneficiaries seem to be better off on productivity and market access but they seem to be worse off on other dimensions

Economic

Human

EnvironmentalSocial

Productivity

0

.75

Beneficiary Exposed in 2014

Non-Beneficiary Control

Upper East

Beneficiaries seem to be better off on productivity, market access and education but they seem to be worse off on other dimensions

Economic

Human

EnvironmentalSocial

Productivity

-.25

0

.25

.5

Beneficiary Exposed in 2014

Non-Beneficiary Control

Upper West

Beneficiaries seem to be better off on market access only but they seem to be worse off on other dimensions; indicates not to have significant bias in targeting

Mali baseline survey data

12

Sampling design- two groups of households are surveyed: AR beneficiaries in treatment sites and non-beneficiaries in control sites

Summary of baseline results

13

Sample size and distribution of households

Cercle Treatment Control All sample

Bougouni 87 143 230

Koutiala 220 176 396

Yanfolila 44 35 79

Total 351 354 705

Some household level summary

Treatment Control 1 vs 2

Household size 4.75 4.28 ***

Avg. adult years of education 4.79 5.27

Avg. land size (ha) 3.07 2.91

Yield of maize (kg/ha) 1565 1263

% of hhs using improved seed (maize) 0.03 0.01

% of hhs using irrigation, last season 0.12 0.08 *

% of hhs experiencing drought in last 5 yrs 0.75 0.69 *

% of hh affected by soil erosion 0.24 0.37 ***

*significant at 10% **significant at 5% ***significant at 1%

Yield for key crops

1566

484557

1544

219

1264

160

626

1392

101

MAIZE MILLET SORGHUM RICE BEANS

Yield of key crops in kg/ha

Treatment Control

Except sorghum AR beneficiary households have higher productivity compared to control households

Economic

Human

EnvironmentalSocial

Productivity

-.25

0

.25

.5

AR-beneficiary control

Sikasso

Beneficiaries seem to be better off on productivity, market access and education but they seem to be worse off on economic and environment

17

Dealing with farm diversity using typology

Objective of the typologies: good fit between targeted farmers and appropriate interventions; socioeconomic stratification

The typologies are can be based following variables:

Non-ag wealth, hh size, land size, cereals production, % prevalence of hired labor, total TLU

Typologies should be tailored to the type of interventions, local conditions and specific needs…

For future scale up typology will be helpful for selection

Planning for dedicated research on this; discussing collaboration opportunity with WUR

PMMT Training Feedback from WA (Training date: 8/1/2014; Venue: Modern City lodge, Tamale)

Strongly

AgreeAgree Neutral Disagree

Strongly

Disagree

1.  The objectives of the training were clearly defined.6 5 1 0 0

2.  Participation and interaction were encouraged. 2 6 2 0 0

3.  The topics covered were relevant to me.2 4 0 0 0

4.  The content was organized and easy to follow.3 5 2 0 0

5. The materials distributed were helpful.2 6 4 0 0

6. This training experience will be useful in my work.3 8 1 0 0

7. The trainer was knowledgeable about the training

topics. 7 3 2 0 0

8. The trainer was well prepared.4 7 1 0 0

9. The training objectives were met.1 8 3 0 0

10. The time allotted for the training was sufficient.3 2 2 4 0

11. The PMMT will be very useful for your research

activities 6 6 0 0 0

AR Project Mapping and Monitoring Tool (PMMT)

Developed an open-access website for storing and mapping project data

Mapping application- to contextualize where AR activities are taking place and

view data to them

Data entry application- users can add additional data through step-by-step

interface

Baseline data provide current status of the treatment and control households for evaluation of AR program efforts

Data collected at the community level (through focus group discussion) confirm the household level findings

Preliminary analysis shows some clear differences between households benefitting from AR and control households

Overall, AR beneficiary households cultivate more lands, plant more diverse set of crops, use more inputs and produce better crop yields than their control counterparts.

With the present evaluation design along with both household and community level data will be used to evaluate overall effectiveness of AR program

Concluding comments on baseline survey data

Africa Research in Sustainable Intensification for the Next Generation

africa-rising.net

The presentation has a Creative Commons licence. You are free to re-use or distribute this work, provided credit is given to ILRI.

Thank You