Ghana - Agribusiness Centers Impact Evaluation

Primary tabs

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.

Acronym: 
ABCIE 2012
Type: 
Microdata
Topics: 
Topic not specified
Economy Coverage: 
Economy Coverage not specified
Languages Supported: 
English
Geographical Coverage: 
Ghana
Reference ID: 
GHA_2012_MCC-ABCIE_v01_M
Release Date: 
March 26, 2019

Harvest Source

Harvest Source: 
Microdata

Harvest Source ID

Harvest Source ID: 
10383

Last Updated

Last Updated: 
March 26, 2019
Study Type: 

Impact Evaluation

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.
Funding Name, Abbreviation, Role: 
Millennium Challenge Corporation
Primary Investigator Name, Affiliation: 
National Opinion Research Center
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.
Unit of Analysis: 
Households
Universe: 
Farmer households in the vicinity of Agribusiness centers.
Version Description: 
-v01: Anonymized dataset for public distribution
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.

No Visualizations Available.

MCC Ghana Impact Evaluation Services Baseline Data Analysis of Agribusiness Centers. 2013. NORC.

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.

FieldValue
Modified Date
2019-04-08
Release Date
Identifier
9dfa2665-581f-4267-9a93-4cd7fa1e3f1f
License
License Not Specified
Contact Email
Public Access Level
Public
Rating: 
0
No votes yet
Reference ID: 
GHA_2012_MCC-ABCIE_v01_M
Acronym: 
ABCIE 2012
Type: 
Languages Supported: 
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.
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.
Primary Investigator Name, Affiliation: 
National Opinion Research Center
Version Description: 
-v01: Anonymized dataset for public distribution
Unit of Analysis: 
Households
Universe: 
Farmer households in the vicinity of Agribusiness centers.
Geographical Coverage: 
Data Classification of a Dataset: 
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.
Release Date: 
Tuesday, March 26, 2019
Last Updated Date: 
Tuesday, March 26, 2019
Harvest Source: 
Harvest Source ID: 
10383
Citation Text: 
MCC Ghana Impact Evaluation Services Baseline Data Analysis of Agribusiness Centers. 2013. NORC.
Modified date: 
17981
Study Type: 
Impact Evaluation
Primary Dataset: 
Yes

Data Access and Licensing

This dataset is classified as Public under the Access to Information Classification Policy. Users inside and outside the Bank can access this dataset.

This dataset is available from an external third-party website. Visit the website to obtain license information. More information

Share Metadata

The information on this page (the dataset metadata) is also available in these formats.

PRINT EMAIL JSON RDF