| dc.description.abstracteng | This dissertation is composed of three papers describing the nexus between natural resource management programs, farmer well-being, and productivity. Our study sheds light on the effectiveness of actions that have been or could be implemented to address the “triangle of poverty.” This triangle connects low farm productivity to high poverty, which forces farmers to increase the pressure on natural resources thus further degrading the environment and resulting in even lower productivity and more poverty.
Natural resource management (NRM) imbeds key agricultural policies, which aim at handling resource degradation while enhancing productivity particularly among smallholder farmers. Technologies promoted through the use of NRM programs encompass conservation agriculture, water and integrated pest management, agroforestry, and silvopastoral activities. Although most of these technologies have been promoted since the early 1960s, it was not until 1989 when the CGIAR emphasized the value of NRM technologies as tools to ensure the sustainability of agricultural systems. Since then, the implementation of NRM programs have evolved around the following definition: “Sustainable agriculture should involve the successful management of resources for agriculture to satisfy changing human needs while maintaining or enhancing the quality of the environment and conserving natural resources (Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research [CGIAR] 2006, p.4).” In general, these programs aim at developing and disseminating technologies, which improve the quality of soil and water, diversify the agro-ecosystem and build farm capacity to mitigate the effects of climate change.
To examine to what extent NRM programs have achieved their aim, in the first essay, meta-regression analysis is used to explore the effect that natural resource management (NRM) programs have on monetary outcomes and on productivity. In doing so, we use a comprehensive dataset of 75 impact evaluation studies and 215 observations from all over the world (equivalent to a sample of 31,991 treated and 42,936 control farmers) to explain why impact varies among studies and across different interventions, regions, and methods. Econometric results from ordered probit, probit, OLS regression, and Bayesian regression models consistently show that NRM programs have a significant positive effect on the monetary outcomes and productivity of beneficiaries relative to control farmers. Overall, NRM technologies increase monetary outcomes on average by 8%, and yields by 13%. Furthermore, the impacts of NRM programs could be larger if: i) participatory methods to transfer the technology to the final user are incorporated in the design; ii) appropriate training to boost the adoption of the technology is provided; iii) NRM technologies are tailored to the rainfall patterns of the intervention area; iv) government units are more efficient in the delivery of technologies; and v) the evaluation of NRM programs account for the time necessary for these programs to produce results.
The first essay compiles evidence from a large number of published analyses. We complement this evidence in the following two essays with original empirical analyses of a specific NRM intervention, the Socio-Environmental and Forestry Development Program-II (POSAF-II), which was implemented by the Nicaraguan Ministry of the Environment and Natural Resources (MARENA). The goal was to promote economic development and environmental sustainability. POSAF-II financed a total of 13,477 farmers occupying 69,767 hectares in several major river basins that were severely damaged by Hurricane Mitch in 1998. Therefore, this program represents a unique opportunity to evaluate the economic impact of NRM programs in an area affected by a massive weather event, characterized by high soil degradation and poverty.
The second essay is an analysis of the economic impact of natural resource technologies delivered by POSAF-II. We use cross-sectional data for 1,483 households, from 212 treated and control communities. Results obtained through propensity score matching (PSM), ordinary least squares (OLS), weighted least squares regression (WLS) based on PSM, and instrumental variables (IV) regression indicate that POSAF-II has had a positive impact on the total value of agricultural production of beneficiary farmers relative to appropriate control groups. The estimated internal rate of return supports the hypothesis that increasing household income while encouraging the sustainable use of natural resources through the implementation of suitable management programs can be complementary development objectives.
The third essay examines the impact of POSAF-II on two critical components of productivity: technological change (TC) and technical efficiency (TE). We use propensity score matching (PSM) to mitigate potential biases from observable variables along with a recently introduced stochastic production frontier (SPF) model that addresses sample selection bias arising from unobservable variables. Our results show that POSAF-II has had a positive impact on both TC and TE. This essay contributes to the literature on impact evaluation by showing how an intervention designed to improve natural resource management can also enhance the income of poor farm households through increases in productivity. | de |