Arouna, A.

Diagne, M.

Mujawamariya, G.

Saito, K.

Twine, Edgar

Yergo, W.

Yergo, Wilfried

Mujawamariya, Gaudiose

Twine, Edgar E.

CGSpace

Conclusion Results❑Study area❖ The survey was conducted in Madagascar, Nigeria, Rwanda and Senegal (Fig. 1).❖Main rice producing areas where rice research innovationsare integrated into the rice value chain were purposivelyselected.❖ In SSA, a large proportion of food is produced bysmallholder farmers, and they are the main providers of workfor the local labor.❖Unfortunately, smallholder farmers are facing a lot ofchallenges including food and nutrition insecurity, andincome variability.❖Crop diversification can be used as a tool to increase farmincomes, create jobs, reduce poverty, and conserve soil andwater resources.❖ The impact of farm diversification on household dietarydiversity and the analysis of factors that affect farmdiversification and dietary diversity were analyzed.Materials and MethodsIntroductionVariablesMadagascar (n=200)Nigeria (n=200)Rwanda (n=197)Senegal (n=198)Overall (n=795)Farm diversity=1 if diversified crop production (%)80.50 61.50 92.39 15.66 62.52Farm production diversity score (Crop & livestock count)3.80 3.62 5.17 2.25 3.71(1.83) (1.92) (2.03) (1.32) (2.07)Dietary diversityHDDS 4.03 6.47 4.32 4.98 4.95(1.91) (3.25) (2.16) (2.09) (2.59)Fig. 2: Socio-economiccharacteristics of thehouseholds: (A) Educationlevel of household head(years), (B) =1 if receivedfarming training, (C) =1 ifreceived contract credit,(D) =1 if engaged in self-employment in the last 12monthsPoster no 683Assessing the impact of farm diversification on household nutrition: evidence of four sub-Saharan African countriesAminou Arouna1, Wilfried G. Yergo1, Kazuki Saito1, Gaudiose Mujawamariya2, Mandiaye Diagne3, Edgar Twine41AfricaRice, Côte d’Ivoire, 2AfricaRice, Madagascar, 3AfricaRice, Senegal, 4AfricaRice, Uganda➢ Encouraging farming households to produce various crop andanimal species can be an effective strategy to improve dietarydiversity among smallholder farmer.➢ However, this relationship is complex; it may be influenced bydemographics and socioeconomic characteristics; institutionalcharacteristics, and farm characteristics of households.Fig. 3: Food groups produced by farm households.Table 1. Household farm diversity and dietary diversity characters.❑Data analysis❖ The main analysis toolin the study isInstrumental Variables(IV) Poisson regression(IV poisson).❑ Variables of interest❖ Farm production diversity score (treatment variable).❖Household Dietary Diversity Score (HDDS) was theoutcome variable.(  ) Standard deviationsAcknowledgementAuthors thank the CGIAR Initiative TAFS-WCA and the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) project“Sustainable and Diversified Rice-based Farming Systems” under the Programme "Putting Research into Use for Nutrition,Sustainable Agriculture and Resilience (PRUNSAR) [Grant no. DCI-FOOD/2015/360-968] for providing financial support for thestudy.*Corresponding author email: a.arouna@cgiar.org4.699.514.873.945.76M A D A G A S C A R N I G E R I A  R W A N D A S E N E G A L  O V E R A L LA22.548.510.6638.8930.19M A D A G A S C A R N I G E R I A  R W A N D A S E N E G A L  O V E R A L LD1%57%23%2%17%BMadagascar Nigeria Rwanda Senegal Overall7%8%61%4%20%CMadagascar Nigeria Rwanda Senegal Overall020406080100120CerealsLivestockTubers and rootsLegumes (Pulses)VegetablesFruitsCerealsLivestockVegetablesLegumes (Pulses)Tubers and rootsFruitsCerealsLivestockLegumes (Pulses)Tubers and rootsFruitsVegetablesCerealsLivestockVegetablesFruitsTubers and rootsLegumes (Pulses)CerealsLivestockLegumes (Pulses)Tubers and rootsVegetablesFruitsMadagascar Nigeria Rwanda Senegal OverallProportion of householdsFood groups produced❖Results showed positive impact of agricultural diversificationon household dietary diversity in the four countries (Table 2).❖Higher education level is a key driver of dietary diversity insmallholder farming households (Table 2).❖Cereals andlivestock are themain householdproductions (Fig3) in the studycountries.❖Only Nigeria hasan HDDS greaterthan or equal to 6(Table 1).VariablesMadagascar (n=200)Nigeria (n=200)Rwanda (n=197)Senegal (n=198)Overall (n=795)HDDSFarm production diversity score0.050** 0.108** 0.063*** 0.086** 0.029**(0.025) (0.043) (0.019) (0.042) (0.013)Education of household head (years)0.026*** 0.007 0.011 0.019*** 0.030***(0.007) (0.008) (0.011) (0.005) (0.003)=1 if engaged in self-employment in the last 12 months0.099 0.086 0.316*** 0.096* 0.210***(0.069) (0.088) (0.074) (0.051) (0.035)=1 if received farming training-0.258** -0.334** 0.576*** 0.598*** 0.230***(0.124) (0.148) (0.123) (0.224) (0.088)=1 if received contract credit0.511*** 0.028 -0.068 0.426*** 0.175**(0.154) (0.241) (0.083) (0.099) (0.074)Constance 1.237*** 2.537*** 1.132*** 1.842*** 1.195***(0.177) (0.335) (0.212) (0.198) (0.121)Table 2. Linkages between production diversification and on-farm diet (IV poisson regression (Control-function estimator)).(  ) Standard error; ** p<0.05, *** p<0.01Fig. 1: Map of survey countriesTropentag 2022, September 14th - 16th, Prague, Czech

Assessing the impact of farm diversification on household nutrition: evidence of four sub-Saharan African countries

https://cgspace.cgiar.org/bitstream/10568/128640/1/Arouna%20et%20al_Diversification_Poster.pdf

Assessing the impact of farm diversification on household  nutrition: evidence of four sub-Saharan African countries

Assessing the impact of farm diversification on household nutrition: evidence of four sub-Saharan African countries

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

CGSpace