Investigating Agricultural Innovation Platforms, Soil Moisture Monitoring Tools and Farm Adaptation Behaviour in Irrigation Schemes in Sub-Saharan Africa

Abstract

This thesis investigates the impact of various irrigation tools and behavioural interventions in irrigation schemes within three countries of Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). The thesis consists of three empirical case studies, namely: i) influences on the adoption of, and willingness to pay (WTP) for, monitoring tools; ii) farm-level effects of irrigation development interventions (agricultural innovation platforms (AIP) and monitoring tools); and iii) influences on irrigation farm adaptation behaviour. Data on farm behaviour was collected by an irrigation development project via two rounds of face-to-face irrigation household surveys in a number of schemes in 2014 and 2017 (following the same households wherever possible). The first study explored irrigation farm households’ adoption willingness for a monitoring tool that was introduced for the first time to farmers operating in four of the irrigation schemes (n=234). A contingent valuation method was implemented to elicit farm households’ WTP. The findings from the Tobit regression indicated that irrigators were interested in adopting (and paying for) monitoring tools – as reflected by their positive average WTP price. WTP was found to be associated with various socio-demographic and locational variables. Given irrigation water saving innovations – such as the monitoring tool – are knowledge-oriented and that the market does not entirely reflect all social adoption costs and benefits, the findings imply that economic measures may not result in the desired adoption. Instead, policy measures fostering social learning may encourage greater technology adoption – so that adoption would have a broader-scale effect at the scheme or catchment level. The second study sought to examine the role that irrigation development interventions had on farming households’ living conditions, after the first four years of implementation. The interventions studied included AIPs – which acted as an instrument for making a series of market and other changes – and monitoring tools devised to induce individual as well as social learning. There remains inadequate research to date conducted on the practical relevance and impact of AIPs within developing countries. Hence, this study contributes to the literature by employing doubly robust estimation regression techniques, as well as considering the likely spillover effects resulting from the project interventions (n=361 for AIPs and n=241 for monitoring tools). The study found a positive and statistically significant association between engagement in AIPs or monitoring tools and irrigation farm and household outcomes. Specifically, farm households participating in AIP events (as compared to those not directly involved in AIPs) had greater on-farm income; had increased ability to fund child education; had an increased chance of obtaining off-farm income; and experienced around one month less of food shortages yearly. Similarly, farmers provided monitoring tools obtained higher on-farm income and had a much greater ability to fund child education, compared with those who were not granted monitoring tools. In addition, there was evidence of a substantial positive spillover effect from the implemented interventions on irrigation households that were not actually involved in AIP events or granted monitoring tools – highlighting the benefit of development projects for the irrigation schemes as a whole. The third study investigated the influences on farm adaptation behaviour in SSA by applying fractional probit and binary probit models. In this study, farm adaption denotes changes in farming practices in reaction to a broad series of uncertainties unique in the farming landscape – such as climate anomalies, market, development projects, health, etc. It investigated two key questions, namely: i) understanding the influences on planned farm adaptation behaviour (i.e., what the farmer planned to do in the next three years from 2014-2017) using the 2014 survey data (n=371); ii) understanding the stability of irrigators taking part in both surveys (n=263) in terms of planned farm adaptation behaviour in 2014 and actual farm implementation three years later in 2017. It was found that a broad array of influences affected various forms of planned farm adaptation behaviour, and that there was not always consistency between the impacts of various influences on the planned and actual adoption of a specific practice. The result also demonstrated that a higher proportion of irrigators actually adopted a particular practice than those who had planned to do so – again indicating strong support for the project implementation within SSA regions. Overall, the findings emphasise the relevance of formulating a diverse range of policy programs to encourage farm adaptation behaviour. In summary, the findings from this thesis contribute to the literature by highlighting that projects committed to fostering social learning and institutional development (such as markets) can have a significant impact on irrigation household outcomes. To achieve further adoption, understanding the influences on existing farmer adoption and farmers’ WTP for new innovations, will help shape future policy programs designed to maximise societal net gains in SSA countries. Another noteworthy implication is that the relevance of appreciating the presence of a strong divergence between irrigation farm practices that irrigators intended to pursue over the coming period and the practical execution of them at a later time. This indicates that policy practitioners should be mindful of this distinction when planning and introducing farm adaptation polices and interventions.