Farmer Innovation Fund Impact Evaluation 2010, Baseline Survey
Ethiopia, 2010
Tigist Ketema
Created on
August 18, 2014
Last modified
August 18, 2014
Page views
95430
Download
4835
Documentation in PDF
Metadata
DDI/XML
JSON
Identification
Survey ID Number
ETH_2010_FIFIE-BL_v01_M
Title
Farmer Innovation Fund Impact Evaluation 2010, Baseline Survey
Subtitle
Baseline Survey
Country
| Name | Country code |
|---|---|
| Ethiopia | ETH |
Study type
Other Household Survey [hh/oth]
Abstract
Agriculture accounts for 85 percent of employment and 46 percent of GDP in Ethiopia. As a result, development in Ethiopia depends on strengthening rural capacity through extension services and through supporting farmer associations and training centers. However, it is difficult for such development to be equal across gender because women farmers have less access to agricultural technology. Given that women account for about 60 percent of agricultural labor in Ethiopia, it is important to understand how and why they differ from men in Ethiopia's agricultural sector. The Farmer Innovation Fund (FIF) is a component of the Rural Capacity Building Projects (RCBP) which seeks to strengthen the extension system and increase gender equality in extension services. FIF provides funds to farmer groups to implement innovative ideas developed and partially funded by the groups themselves. FIF also plans to decentralize funding from the woreda, or ward, level to the farmer training center level.
To evaluate the effectiveness of FIF, an impact evaluation study was conducted in Amhara and Tigray states, where FIF was rolled out as a randomized intervention. The impact evaluation included three surveys: a baseline, conducted in August-October 2010; a midline, carried out in April 2012; and an endline, administered in June 2013. The data collected from the surveys examined how women-only training programs effect women's participation in agricultural and extension services and which kind of training package is the most effective in improving women's economic empowerment. In addition, the impact evaluation studied the effects that participation in training has on intra-household allocation of resources, decision making within households, and domestic violence. Also, variables related to food consumption enabled an analysis of how training programs affect children's nutrition.
The baseline survey covered 2,675 households. Within each household, surveys were given to men and women. From the 2,675 households, 869 are non-FIF households that were used as a pure control group and the remaining 1,806 were FIF households. A simple lottery design was used to randomly assign half of FIF households to the treatment group and half to the control group. In addition to the FIF households, women in treatment households received FIF training, while women in the control households did not.
To evaluate the effectiveness of FIF, an impact evaluation study was conducted in Amhara and Tigray states, where FIF was rolled out as a randomized intervention. The impact evaluation included three surveys: a baseline, conducted in August-October 2010; a midline, carried out in April 2012; and an endline, administered in June 2013. The data collected from the surveys examined how women-only training programs effect women's participation in agricultural and extension services and which kind of training package is the most effective in improving women's economic empowerment. In addition, the impact evaluation studied the effects that participation in training has on intra-household allocation of resources, decision making within households, and domestic violence. Also, variables related to food consumption enabled an analysis of how training programs affect children's nutrition.
The baseline survey covered 2,675 households. Within each household, surveys were given to men and women. From the 2,675 households, 869 are non-FIF households that were used as a pure control group and the remaining 1,806 were FIF households. A simple lottery design was used to randomly assign half of FIF households to the treatment group and half to the control group. In addition to the FIF households, women in treatment households received FIF training, while women in the control households did not.
Kind of Data
Sample survey data [ssd]
Unit of Analysis
Households
Version
Version Description
v01; edited, anonymized datasets for public distribution.
Each dataset describes a certain section from the Men's or Women's Modules of the questionnaires. The datasets' names indicate the sections in the questionnaires.
Each dataset describes a certain section from the Men's or Women's Modules of the questionnaires. The datasets' names indicate the sections in the questionnaires.
Scope
Notes
The scope of the study includes:
- Technology adoption and use of extension services
- Agricultural productivity
- Income of men and women
- Willingness to pay for technological innovations
- Intensity of labor supply
- Investment in capital
- Participation in groups and contribution to public goods
- Technology adoption and use of extension services
- Agricultural productivity
- Income of men and women
- Willingness to pay for technological innovations
- Intensity of labor supply
- Investment in capital
- Participation in groups and contribution to public goods
Coverage
Geographic Coverage
Amhara and Tigray states
Producers and sponsors
Primary investigators
| Name | Affiliation |
|---|---|
| Tigist Ketema | World Bank, Africa Gender Lab |
Funding Agency/Sponsor
| Name |
|---|
| World Bank |
Sampling
Sampling Procedure
A FIF subset was rolled out in 40 of the 100 targeted kebeles, or neighborhoods, as a randomized intervention at the farmer-group level in Amhara and Tigray regions. The sample size of baseline survey was 2,675 households. A simple lottery among the FIF sample was used to divide the sample into treatment and control groups. Specifically, from the 2,675 households, 1,806 were randomly assigned to the treatment group and 869 were assigned to the control group. In the FIF program the incentive was given both to male and female FIF members while nothing was given to those in the control group.
Weighting
None
Data Collection
Dates of Data Collection
| Start | End |
|---|---|
| 2010-08-01 | 2010-10-01 |
Data Collection Mode
Face-to-face [f2f]
Questionnaires
Questionnaires
The data were collected using two six-module questionnaires, one for the men of the household and one for the women.
"Household Questionnaire, Men's Modules" includes the following sections:
1 - Basic Household Characteristics
2 - Land, Crop and Forestry Production, and Disposition
3 - Credit, Savings and Risk
4 - Income Apart from Own-agricultural Activities
5 - Household Assets
6 - Groups and Networks
"Household Questionnaire, Women's Modules" includes the following sections:
1 - Basic Household Characteristics
2 - Use of Extension Services, Technology Adoption, and Farmer Innovation Fund
3 - Credit, Savings and Risk
4 - Income Apart from Own-Agricultural Activities and Credit
5 - Consumption
6 - Groups and Networks
Though men's and women's questionnaires were similar im most ascepts, there were a few differences between them. For example, women were asked about their use of extension services and specific questions about Farmer Innovation Fund. They were also asked about consumption, while, on the other hand, men were asked about household assets. Within each module, the questionnaires asked respondents about different aspects of their life, such as basic household characteristics, agricultural production and innovation, income, and participation in groups and networks.
"Household Questionnaire, Men's Modules" includes the following sections:
1 - Basic Household Characteristics
2 - Land, Crop and Forestry Production, and Disposition
3 - Credit, Savings and Risk
4 - Income Apart from Own-agricultural Activities
5 - Household Assets
6 - Groups and Networks
"Household Questionnaire, Women's Modules" includes the following sections:
1 - Basic Household Characteristics
2 - Use of Extension Services, Technology Adoption, and Farmer Innovation Fund
3 - Credit, Savings and Risk
4 - Income Apart from Own-Agricultural Activities and Credit
5 - Consumption
6 - Groups and Networks
Though men's and women's questionnaires were similar im most ascepts, there were a few differences between them. For example, women were asked about their use of extension services and specific questions about Farmer Innovation Fund. They were also asked about consumption, while, on the other hand, men were asked about household assets. Within each module, the questionnaires asked respondents about different aspects of their life, such as basic household characteristics, agricultural production and innovation, income, and participation in groups and networks.
Access policy
Contacts
| Name | Affiliation | |
|---|---|---|
| Tigist Ketema | World Bank | tketema@worldbank.org |
| Brittany Hill | World Bank | bnhill@worldbank.org |
Citation requirements
The use of the datasets must be acknowledged using a citation which would include:
- the identification of the Primary Investigator (including country name);
- the full title of the survey and its acronym (when available), and the year(s) of implementation;
- the survey reference number;
- the source and date of download (for datasets disseminated online).
Example:
Tigist Ketema, World Bank. Ethiopia Farmer Innovation Fund Impact Evaluation 2010, Baseline Survey (FIFIE-BL). Ref. ETH_2010_FIFIE-BL_v01_M. Dataset downloaded from [URL] on [date].
- the identification of the Primary Investigator (including country name);
- the full title of the survey and its acronym (when available), and the year(s) of implementation;
- the survey reference number;
- the source and date of download (for datasets disseminated online).
Example:
Tigist Ketema, World Bank. Ethiopia Farmer Innovation Fund Impact Evaluation 2010, Baseline Survey (FIFIE-BL). Ref. ETH_2010_FIFIE-BL_v01_M. Dataset downloaded from [URL] on [date].
Disclaimer and copyrights
Disclaimer
The user of the data acknowledges that the original collector of the data, the authorized distributor of the data, and the relevant funding agency bear no responsibility for use of the data or for interpretations or inferences based upon such uses.
Metadata production
DDI Document ID
DDI_ETH_2010_FIFIE-BL_v01_M_WB
Producers
| Name | Abbreviation | Affiliation |
|---|---|---|
| Development Data Group | DECDG | World Bank |
| Gender Impact Evaluation | AFRGI | World Bank |
Date of Metadata Production
2014-07-28
DDI Document version
v01 (July 2014)