Indifferent to difference? Understanding the unequal impacts of farming technologies among smallholders. A review

With many of the world’s poor engaged in agriculture, agricultural development programmes often aim to improve livelihoods through improved farming practices. Research on the impacts of agricultural technology interventions is dominated by comparisons of adopters and non-adopters. By contrast, in this literature study, we critically review how technology evaluation studies assess differentiated impacts in smallholder farming communities. We searched systematically for studies which present agricultural technology impacts disaggregated for poor and relatively better-off users (adopters). The major findings of our systematic review are as follows: (1) The number of studies that assessed impact differentiation was startlingly small: we were able to identify only 85, among which only 24 presented empirical findings. (2) These studies confirm an expected trend: absolute benefits are larger for the better-off, and large relative benefits among the poor are mostly due to meagre baseline performance. (3) Households are primarily considered as independent entities, rather than as connected with others directly or indirectly, via markets or common resource pools. (4) Explanations for impact differentiation are mainly sought in existing distributions of structural household characteristics. We collated the explanations provided in the selected studies across a nested hierarchy: the field, the farm or household, and households interacting at the farming system level. We also consider impact differentiation over time. With this, we provide a structured overview of potential drivers of differentiation, to guide future research for development towards explicitly recognizing the poor among the poor, acknowledging unequal impacts, aiming to avoid negative consequences, and mitigating them where they occur.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Thuijsman, E.S., Braber, H.J., Andersson, J.A., Descheemaeker, K., Baudron, F., Lopez-Ridaura, S., Vanlauwe, B., Giller, K.E.
Format: Article biblioteca
Language:English
Published: Springer 2022
Subjects:AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES AND BIOTECHNOLOGY, Research for Development, Technology Adoption, Inequality, Interventions, EVALUATION, RESEARCH, TECHNOLOGY, SMALLHOLDERS, FARM EQUIPMENT,
Online Access:https://hdl.handle.net/10883/22084
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
id dig-cimmyt-10883-22084
record_format koha
spelling dig-cimmyt-10883-220842023-09-08T21:10:36Z Indifferent to difference? Understanding the unequal impacts of farming technologies among smallholders. A review Thuijsman, E.S. Braber, H.J. Andersson, J.A. Descheemaeker, K. Baudron, F. Lopez-Ridaura, S. Vanlauwe, B. Giller, K.E. AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES AND BIOTECHNOLOGY Research for Development Technology Adoption Inequality Interventions EVALUATION RESEARCH TECHNOLOGY SMALLHOLDERS FARM EQUIPMENT With many of the world’s poor engaged in agriculture, agricultural development programmes often aim to improve livelihoods through improved farming practices. Research on the impacts of agricultural technology interventions is dominated by comparisons of adopters and non-adopters. By contrast, in this literature study, we critically review how technology evaluation studies assess differentiated impacts in smallholder farming communities. We searched systematically for studies which present agricultural technology impacts disaggregated for poor and relatively better-off users (adopters). The major findings of our systematic review are as follows: (1) The number of studies that assessed impact differentiation was startlingly small: we were able to identify only 85, among which only 24 presented empirical findings. (2) These studies confirm an expected trend: absolute benefits are larger for the better-off, and large relative benefits among the poor are mostly due to meagre baseline performance. (3) Households are primarily considered as independent entities, rather than as connected with others directly or indirectly, via markets or common resource pools. (4) Explanations for impact differentiation are mainly sought in existing distributions of structural household characteristics. We collated the explanations provided in the selected studies across a nested hierarchy: the field, the farm or household, and households interacting at the farming system level. We also consider impact differentiation over time. With this, we provide a structured overview of potential drivers of differentiation, to guide future research for development towards explicitly recognizing the poor among the poor, acknowledging unequal impacts, aiming to avoid negative consequences, and mitigating them where they occur. 2022-06-07T00:38:19Z 2022-06-07T00:38:19Z 2022 Article Published Version https://hdl.handle.net/10883/22084 10.1007/s13593-022-00768-6 English https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13593-022-00768-6#Sec14 CIMMYT manages Intellectual Assets as International Public Goods. The user is free to download, print, store and share this work. In case you want to translate or create any other derivative work and share or distribute such translation/derivative work, please contact CIMMYT-Knowledge-Center@cgiar.org indicating the work you want to use and the kind of use you intend; CIMMYT will contact you with the suitable license for that purpose Open Access Germany Springer 3 42 1774-0746 Agronomy for Sustainable Development 41
institution CIMMYT
collection DSpace
country México
countrycode MX
component Bibliográfico
access En linea
databasecode dig-cimmyt
tag biblioteca
region America del Norte
libraryname CIMMYT Library
language English
topic AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES AND BIOTECHNOLOGY
Research for Development
Technology Adoption
Inequality
Interventions
EVALUATION
RESEARCH
TECHNOLOGY
SMALLHOLDERS
FARM EQUIPMENT
AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES AND BIOTECHNOLOGY
Research for Development
Technology Adoption
Inequality
Interventions
EVALUATION
RESEARCH
TECHNOLOGY
SMALLHOLDERS
FARM EQUIPMENT
spellingShingle AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES AND BIOTECHNOLOGY
Research for Development
Technology Adoption
Inequality
Interventions
EVALUATION
RESEARCH
TECHNOLOGY
SMALLHOLDERS
FARM EQUIPMENT
AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES AND BIOTECHNOLOGY
Research for Development
Technology Adoption
Inequality
Interventions
EVALUATION
RESEARCH
TECHNOLOGY
SMALLHOLDERS
FARM EQUIPMENT
Thuijsman, E.S.
Braber, H.J.
Andersson, J.A.
Descheemaeker, K.
Baudron, F.
Lopez-Ridaura, S.
Vanlauwe, B.
Giller, K.E.
Indifferent to difference? Understanding the unequal impacts of farming technologies among smallholders. A review
description With many of the world’s poor engaged in agriculture, agricultural development programmes often aim to improve livelihoods through improved farming practices. Research on the impacts of agricultural technology interventions is dominated by comparisons of adopters and non-adopters. By contrast, in this literature study, we critically review how technology evaluation studies assess differentiated impacts in smallholder farming communities. We searched systematically for studies which present agricultural technology impacts disaggregated for poor and relatively better-off users (adopters). The major findings of our systematic review are as follows: (1) The number of studies that assessed impact differentiation was startlingly small: we were able to identify only 85, among which only 24 presented empirical findings. (2) These studies confirm an expected trend: absolute benefits are larger for the better-off, and large relative benefits among the poor are mostly due to meagre baseline performance. (3) Households are primarily considered as independent entities, rather than as connected with others directly or indirectly, via markets or common resource pools. (4) Explanations for impact differentiation are mainly sought in existing distributions of structural household characteristics. We collated the explanations provided in the selected studies across a nested hierarchy: the field, the farm or household, and households interacting at the farming system level. We also consider impact differentiation over time. With this, we provide a structured overview of potential drivers of differentiation, to guide future research for development towards explicitly recognizing the poor among the poor, acknowledging unequal impacts, aiming to avoid negative consequences, and mitigating them where they occur.
format Article
topic_facet AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES AND BIOTECHNOLOGY
Research for Development
Technology Adoption
Inequality
Interventions
EVALUATION
RESEARCH
TECHNOLOGY
SMALLHOLDERS
FARM EQUIPMENT
author Thuijsman, E.S.
Braber, H.J.
Andersson, J.A.
Descheemaeker, K.
Baudron, F.
Lopez-Ridaura, S.
Vanlauwe, B.
Giller, K.E.
author_facet Thuijsman, E.S.
Braber, H.J.
Andersson, J.A.
Descheemaeker, K.
Baudron, F.
Lopez-Ridaura, S.
Vanlauwe, B.
Giller, K.E.
author_sort Thuijsman, E.S.
title Indifferent to difference? Understanding the unequal impacts of farming technologies among smallholders. A review
title_short Indifferent to difference? Understanding the unequal impacts of farming technologies among smallholders. A review
title_full Indifferent to difference? Understanding the unequal impacts of farming technologies among smallholders. A review
title_fullStr Indifferent to difference? Understanding the unequal impacts of farming technologies among smallholders. A review
title_full_unstemmed Indifferent to difference? Understanding the unequal impacts of farming technologies among smallholders. A review
title_sort indifferent to difference? understanding the unequal impacts of farming technologies among smallholders. a review
publisher Springer
publishDate 2022
url https://hdl.handle.net/10883/22084
work_keys_str_mv AT thuijsmanes indifferenttodifferenceunderstandingtheunequalimpactsoffarmingtechnologiesamongsmallholdersareview
AT braberhj indifferenttodifferenceunderstandingtheunequalimpactsoffarmingtechnologiesamongsmallholdersareview
AT anderssonja indifferenttodifferenceunderstandingtheunequalimpactsoffarmingtechnologiesamongsmallholdersareview
AT descheemaekerk indifferenttodifferenceunderstandingtheunequalimpactsoffarmingtechnologiesamongsmallholdersareview
AT baudronf indifferenttodifferenceunderstandingtheunequalimpactsoffarmingtechnologiesamongsmallholdersareview
AT lopezridauras indifferenttodifferenceunderstandingtheunequalimpactsoffarmingtechnologiesamongsmallholdersareview
AT vanlauweb indifferenttodifferenceunderstandingtheunequalimpactsoffarmingtechnologiesamongsmallholdersareview
AT gillerke indifferenttodifferenceunderstandingtheunequalimpactsoffarmingtechnologiesamongsmallholdersareview
_version_ 1777674068060798976