Agribusiness Centers Impact Evaluation
Ghana, 2012
Get MicrodataCreated on
Mar 29, 2019
Last modified
Mar 29, 2019
Page views
65804
Identification
Survey ID Number
GHA_2012_MCC-ABCIE_v01_M
Title
Agribusiness Centers Impact Evaluation
Country
| Name | Country code |
|---|---|
| Ghana | GHA |
Study type
Impact Evaluation
Abstract
The Millennium Development Authority (MiDA) financed the construction of 10 Agribusiness Centers (ABCs) to provide services for the initial processing, storage, and marketing of grain crops produced by farmer-based organizations (FBOs) within their respective intervention areas. This data contains baseline information for the impact evaluation of this activity.
The treatment group for each ABC is comprised of households interviewed in the baseline survey that belong to MIDA trained FBOs within approximately 20-kilometer radius around the ABC. The comparison group for each ABC is selected from those MiDA-trained FBOs that are located outside the approximately 20-kilometer radius around the ABC. Therefore, those FBOs forming the comparison group will be loosely located between two concentric circles centered on the ABC; the inner circle will have a radius of approximately 20 kilometers, and the outer circle will have a radius of approximately 30 kilometers.
The three main research hypotheses this evaluation will try to answer (once endline data is collected), presented in form of hypotheses to be tested are: 1) access to ABCs will reduce post-harvest losses; 2) access to ABCs will imply higher market prices; and 3) access to ABCs will lead to higher crop yields. This, in turn, increases total production, total profits and, therefore, farmers' income from crop harvest.
To estimate the casual impact of this program, once endline data is collected, NORC proposed to use a double-difference estimator with matching or covariate controls as appropriate, or a combined regression analysis/matching approach to assess changes in farmers income, production, crop revenue and post-harvest losses related to access to ABCs.
We document some differences between households in the treatment and the comparison group. In particular, household heads in the treatment group are less likely to be female and have less education than in the comparison group. In agricultural practices too, we see some important differences. Households in the treatment group are more likely to grow kernel maize than households in the comparison group, which are more likely to cultivate fresh maize and rice. Treatment households cultivate a larger proportion of their land than do comparison households; conversely, comparison households irrigate a higher fraction of their land. While we see these and some other differences between the two study groups, they are similar in many other important characteristics such as number of household members, the fraction of children currently in school, and the likelihood of having experienced hunger. We also do not find major differences for agricultural or total income. This is important because it suggests that treatment and comparison groups are relatively comparable.
The treatment group for each ABC is comprised of households interviewed in the baseline survey that belong to MIDA trained FBOs within approximately 20-kilometer radius around the ABC. The comparison group for each ABC is selected from those MiDA-trained FBOs that are located outside the approximately 20-kilometer radius around the ABC. Therefore, those FBOs forming the comparison group will be loosely located between two concentric circles centered on the ABC; the inner circle will have a radius of approximately 20 kilometers, and the outer circle will have a radius of approximately 30 kilometers.
The three main research hypotheses this evaluation will try to answer (once endline data is collected), presented in form of hypotheses to be tested are: 1) access to ABCs will reduce post-harvest losses; 2) access to ABCs will imply higher market prices; and 3) access to ABCs will lead to higher crop yields. This, in turn, increases total production, total profits and, therefore, farmers' income from crop harvest.
To estimate the casual impact of this program, once endline data is collected, NORC proposed to use a double-difference estimator with matching or covariate controls as appropriate, or a combined regression analysis/matching approach to assess changes in farmers income, production, crop revenue and post-harvest losses related to access to ABCs.
We document some differences between households in the treatment and the comparison group. In particular, household heads in the treatment group are less likely to be female and have less education than in the comparison group. In agricultural practices too, we see some important differences. Households in the treatment group are more likely to grow kernel maize than households in the comparison group, which are more likely to cultivate fresh maize and rice. Treatment households cultivate a larger proportion of their land than do comparison households; conversely, comparison households irrigate a higher fraction of their land. While we see these and some other differences between the two study groups, they are similar in many other important characteristics such as number of household members, the fraction of children currently in school, and the likelihood of having experienced hunger. We also do not find major differences for agricultural or total income. This is important because it suggests that treatment and comparison groups are relatively comparable.
Unit of Analysis
Households
Version
Version Description
-v01: Anonymized dataset for public distribution
Coverage
Geographic Coverage
The baseline data includes information from four regions in Ghana: Ashanti, Central, Eastern and Northern.
Universe
Farmer households in the vicinity of Agribusiness centers.
Producers and sponsors
Primary investigators
| Name |
|---|
| National Opinion Research Center |
Funding Agency/Sponsor
| Name | Abbreviation |
|---|---|
| Millennium Challenge Corporation | MCC |
Sampling
Sampling Procedure
The sample was drawn in two stages: first we selected Farmer-Based Organizations (FBOs) to be part of the sample and then we selected a sample of farmers associated to such FBOs. We included up to 10 randomly selected FBOs that are co-owners of the 8 ABCs. Sometimes fewer than 10 FBOs are associated with an ABC, in those case we selected them all. We randomly selected the same number of the non-co-owner FBOs that are located within the 20-miles radius (ITT), as well as FBOs located in the contiguous 10 miles. In the case that there were fewer FBOs we selected them all. In turn, 10 farmers were randomly selected from each FBO's members list. In total we have 2,007 farmer households in our sample.
Weighting
No weights are implemented in this analysis because its objective is not to replicate parameters for a certain population but to evaluate the impact of the intervention.
Data Collection
Dates of Data Collection
| Start | End | Cycle |
|---|---|---|
| 2012-09-11 | 2012-12-15 | ABC Baseline |
Data Collection Mode
Face-to-face [f2f]
Access policy
Contacts
| Name | URL |
|---|---|
| Contact MCC | Link |
Citation requirements
MCC Ghana Impact Evaluation Services Baseline Data Analysis of Agribusiness Centers. 2013. NORC.
Location of Data Collection
Millennium Challenge Corporation - MCC -
Archive where study is originally stored
Millennium Challenge Corporation - MCC -
https://data.mcc.gov/evaluations/index.php/catalog/171/get_microdata
Cost:None
https://data.mcc.gov/evaluations/index.php/catalog/171/get_microdata
Cost:None
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_GHA_2012_MCC-ABCIE_v01_M
Producers
| Name | Abbreviation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Millennium Challenge Corporation | MCC | Review of Metadata |
| National Opinion Research Center | NORC | Documentation of the study |
Date of Metadata Production
2019-03-21
DDI Document version
Version 01 (March 2019). Edited version based on Version 01 (DDI-MCC-GHA-NORC-Ag-2013-v01) that was done by Millennium Challenge Corporation.