+ All Categories
Home > Health & Medicine > Alan de Brauw (and others) IFPRI "Bio-fortification, Crop Adaption and Health Information"

Alan de Brauw (and others) IFPRI "Bio-fortification, Crop Adaption and Health Information"

Date post: 14-Dec-2014
Category:
Upload: independent-science-and-partnership-council-of-the-cgiar
View: 122 times
Download: 3 times
Share this document with a friend
Description:
Science Forum 2013 (www.scienceforum13.org) Breakout Session 4: Value Chains Alan de Brauw (and others) IFPRI
25
Introduction Basic Findings Causal Mechanisms Marketing Conclusion Biofortification, crop adoption and health information: Impact pathways in Mozambique and Uganda Alan de Brauw 1 , Patrick Eozenou 2 , Dan Gilligan 1 , Christine Hotz 4 , Neha Kumar 1 , and J.V. Meenakshi 3 1 International Food Policy Research Institute 24 September 2013/ CGIAR Science Forum de Brauw et al. REU Impact Pathways
Transcript
Page 1: Alan de Brauw (and others) IFPRI "Bio-fortification, Crop Adaption and Health Information"

IntroductionBasic Findings

Causal MechanismsMarketing

Conclusion

Biofortification, crop adoption and healthinformation:

Impact pathways in Mozambique and Uganda

Alan de Brauw1, Patrick Eozenou2, Dan Gilligan1, ChristineHotz4, Neha Kumar1, and J.V. Meenakshi3

1International Food Policy Research Institute

24 September 2013/ CGIAR Science Forum

de Brauw et al. REU Impact Pathways

Page 2: Alan de Brauw (and others) IFPRI "Bio-fortification, Crop Adaption and Health Information"

IntroductionBasic Findings

Causal MechanismsMarketing

Conclusion

Outline

1 IntroductionProject DetailsImpact Evaluation Design

2 Basic FindingsCrop AdoptionDietary Intakes

3 Causal MechanismsConceptual Framework

4 Marketing

5 Conclusion

de Brauw et al. REU Impact Pathways

Page 3: Alan de Brauw (and others) IFPRI "Bio-fortification, Crop Adaption and Health Information"

IntroductionBasic Findings

Causal MechanismsMarketing

Conclusion

Project DetailsImpact Evaluation Design

REU Project: Biofortification

Took place between 2006 and 2009 in Zambézia Province,Mozambique, and UgandaVitamin A deficiency a large concern in both countriesThe REU used an integrated approach to promote OFSPadoption with goal of reducing vitamin A deficiency amongmothers and young children

Seed Systems Component (Production)Demand Creation Component (Consumption)Market/Product Development Component (Exchange)

Large research component, many partners

de Brauw et al. REU Impact Pathways

Page 4: Alan de Brauw (and others) IFPRI "Bio-fortification, Crop Adaption and Health Information"

IntroductionBasic Findings

Causal MechanismsMarketing

Conclusion

Project DetailsImpact Evaluation Design

Objective of Presentation

Understand impacts on major outcome goals: Adoptionand Vitamin A Consumption

Unfortunately, could not randomize in, for example, theconsumption component

Therefore a technique called causal mechanism analysisto determine which factors were important in determining:

Adoption, andVitamin A Consumption

Consider how marketing should be integrated into futurebiofortification programs

de Brauw et al. REU Impact Pathways

Page 5: Alan de Brauw (and others) IFPRI "Bio-fortification, Crop Adaption and Health Information"

IntroductionBasic Findings

Causal MechanismsMarketing

Conclusion

Project DetailsImpact Evaluation Design

Impact Evaluation Design

Model 1, Model 2, Control GroupsVillages were stratified approximately by district in bothcountriesControl group only got vines in 2010 after evaluationcomponent was complete

Impact Evaluation SurveysSocioeconomic Survey : Included information on householddemographics, agriculture, and knowledge gains fromprogramNutrition Survey: Included 24 hour recall module tomeasure individual dietary intakes of vitamin A and othernutrients among young children and their mothers

de Brauw et al. REU Impact Pathways

Page 6: Alan de Brauw (and others) IFPRI "Bio-fortification, Crop Adaption and Health Information"

IntroductionBasic Findings

Causal MechanismsMarketing

Conclusion

Project DetailsImpact Evaluation Design

Impact Evaluation Design

Model 1, Model 2, Control GroupsVillages were stratified approximately by district in bothcountriesControl group only got vines in 2010 after evaluationcomponent was complete

Impact Evaluation SurveysSocioeconomic Survey : Included information on householddemographics, agriculture, and knowledge gains fromprogramNutrition Survey: Included 24 hour recall module tomeasure individual dietary intakes of vitamin A and othernutrients among young children and their mothers

de Brauw et al. REU Impact Pathways

Page 7: Alan de Brauw (and others) IFPRI "Bio-fortification, Crop Adaption and Health Information"

IntroductionBasic Findings

Causal MechanismsMarketing

Conclusion

Project DetailsImpact Evaluation Design

Impact Evaluation Design

Model 1, Model 2, Control GroupsVillages were stratified approximately by district in bothcountriesControl group only got vines in 2010 after evaluationcomponent was complete

Impact Evaluation SurveysSocioeconomic Survey : Included information on householddemographics, agriculture, and knowledge gains fromprogramNutrition Survey: Included 24 hour recall module tomeasure individual dietary intakes of vitamin A and othernutrients among young children and their mothers

de Brauw et al. REU Impact Pathways

Page 8: Alan de Brauw (and others) IFPRI "Bio-fortification, Crop Adaption and Health Information"

IntroductionBasic Findings

Causal MechanismsMarketing

Conclusion

Project DetailsImpact Evaluation Design

Impact Evaluation Design

Model 1, Model 2, Control GroupsVillages were stratified approximately by district in bothcountriesControl group only got vines in 2010 after evaluationcomponent was complete

Impact Evaluation SurveysSocioeconomic Survey : Included information on householddemographics, agriculture, and knowledge gains fromprogramNutrition Survey: Included 24 hour recall module tomeasure individual dietary intakes of vitamin A and othernutrients among young children and their mothers

de Brauw et al. REU Impact Pathways

Page 9: Alan de Brauw (and others) IFPRI "Bio-fortification, Crop Adaption and Health Information"

IntroductionBasic Findings

Causal MechanismsMarketing

Conclusion

Crop AdoptionDietary Intakes

Measures of OFSP Adoption

Primary measure, Adoption, defined as:In Uganda, whether farmers were growing OFSP in fourthseason after receiving vinesIn Mozambique, answer to question: Do farmers keep vinesfor 2010?

Secondary measure (not presented here): Share of OFSPin total area planted in sweet potato

de Brauw et al. REU Impact Pathways

Page 10: Alan de Brauw (and others) IFPRI "Bio-fortification, Crop Adaption and Health Information"

IntroductionBasic Findings

Causal MechanismsMarketing

Conclusion

Crop AdoptionDietary Intakes

Proportion of Households Adopting OFSP,Mozambique

de Brauw et al. REU Impact Pathways

Page 11: Alan de Brauw (and others) IFPRI "Bio-fortification, Crop Adaption and Health Information"

IntroductionBasic Findings

Causal MechanismsMarketing

Conclusion

Crop AdoptionDietary Intakes

Proportion of Households Adopting OFSP, Uganda

de Brauw et al. REU Impact Pathways

Page 12: Alan de Brauw (and others) IFPRI "Bio-fortification, Crop Adaption and Health Information"

IntroductionBasic Findings

Causal MechanismsMarketing

Conclusion

Crop AdoptionDietary Intakes

Summary: Adoption and Nutritional Knowledge

Large impacts on OFSP adoptionNo difference between Models 1 and 2But only modest impacts on knowledge of messages aboutvitamin AMost (almost all) mothers reported knowing of vitamin A atend of project (not shown)

Strong impact on mothers knowing that OFSP is a sourceof vitamin A at endline (30-40% of mothers)

de Brauw et al. REU Impact Pathways

Page 13: Alan de Brauw (and others) IFPRI "Bio-fortification, Crop Adaption and Health Information"

IntroductionBasic Findings

Causal MechanismsMarketing

Conclusion

Crop AdoptionDietary Intakes

Summary: Adoption and Nutritional Knowledge

Large impacts on OFSP adoptionNo difference between Models 1 and 2But only modest impacts on knowledge of messages aboutvitamin AMost (almost all) mothers reported knowing of vitamin A atend of project (not shown)

Strong impact on mothers knowing that OFSP is a sourceof vitamin A at endline (30-40% of mothers)

de Brauw et al. REU Impact Pathways

Page 14: Alan de Brauw (and others) IFPRI "Bio-fortification, Crop Adaption and Health Information"

IntroductionBasic Findings

Causal MechanismsMarketing

Conclusion

Crop AdoptionDietary Intakes

Summary: Adoption and Nutritional Knowledge

Large impacts on OFSP adoptionNo difference between Models 1 and 2But only modest impacts on knowledge of messages aboutvitamin AMost (almost all) mothers reported knowing of vitamin A atend of project (not shown)

Strong impact on mothers knowing that OFSP is a sourceof vitamin A at endline (30-40% of mothers)

de Brauw et al. REU Impact Pathways

Page 15: Alan de Brauw (and others) IFPRI "Bio-fortification, Crop Adaption and Health Information"

IntroductionBasic Findings

Causal MechanismsMarketing

Conclusion

Crop AdoptionDietary Intakes

Summary: Adoption and Nutritional Knowledge

Large impacts on OFSP adoptionNo difference between Models 1 and 2But only modest impacts on knowledge of messages aboutvitamin AMost (almost all) mothers reported knowing of vitamin A atend of project (not shown)

Strong impact on mothers knowing that OFSP is a sourceof vitamin A at endline (30-40% of mothers)

de Brauw et al. REU Impact Pathways

Page 16: Alan de Brauw (and others) IFPRI "Bio-fortification, Crop Adaption and Health Information"

IntroductionBasic Findings

Causal MechanismsMarketing

Conclusion

Crop AdoptionDietary Intakes

Impacts: Dietary Intakes

Main measure: micrograms of vitamin A in dietComputed from foods consumed, which are converted intonutrients

Can also predict the impact on vitamin A deficiency aftercontrolling for intraday variation in intakes (BLUPs)Children in Mozambique aged 6-35 months at baseline;children in Uganda 4-6 years old at baseline

de Brauw et al. REU Impact Pathways

Page 17: Alan de Brauw (and others) IFPRI "Bio-fortification, Crop Adaption and Health Information"

IntroductionBasic Findings

Causal MechanismsMarketing

Conclusion

Crop AdoptionDietary Intakes

Impacts: Dietary Intakes

Main measure: micrograms of vitamin A in dietComputed from foods consumed, which are converted intonutrients

Can also predict the impact on vitamin A deficiency aftercontrolling for intraday variation in intakes (BLUPs)Children in Mozambique aged 6-35 months at baseline;children in Uganda 4-6 years old at baseline

de Brauw et al. REU Impact Pathways

Page 18: Alan de Brauw (and others) IFPRI "Bio-fortification, Crop Adaption and Health Information"

IntroductionBasic Findings

Causal MechanismsMarketing

Conclusion

Crop AdoptionDietary Intakes

Results: Dietary Intakes, Reference Children

Mozambique UgandaImpact, Impact, Impact, Impact,

Group DI BLUPs DI BLUPsModel 1 243.0** 203.8** 308.3** 338.8**

(85.8) (35.0) (148.3) (38.3)Model 2 211.8** 208.4** 677.1** 377.5**

(96.3) (26.3) (222.0) (78.0)Average 226.0** 206.4** 449.7** 274.7**

(81.6) (22.5) (145.7) (42.9)

de Brauw et al. REU Impact Pathways

Page 19: Alan de Brauw (and others) IFPRI "Bio-fortification, Crop Adaption and Health Information"

IntroductionBasic Findings

Causal MechanismsMarketing

Conclusion

Crop AdoptionDietary Intakes

Summary: Impacts on Dietary Intakes

Average vitamin A consumption increase about the USDARDA level (210 µg per day)But no other significant changes to dietAgain, no significant differences between Models 1 and 2

de Brauw et al. REU Impact Pathways

Page 20: Alan de Brauw (and others) IFPRI "Bio-fortification, Crop Adaption and Health Information"

IntroductionBasic Findings

Causal MechanismsMarketing

Conclusion

Conceptual Framework

Mechanisms

de Brauw et al. REU Impact Pathways

Page 21: Alan de Brauw (and others) IFPRI "Bio-fortification, Crop Adaption and Health Information"

IntroductionBasic Findings

Causal MechanismsMarketing

Conclusion

Conceptual Framework

Estimation

Sequentially estimate two equations of the form (Imai et al.,2011):

Mi = α1 + βTi + γ1Zi + ui

Ai = α2 + ηTi + ζMi + γ2Zi + εi

Under assumptions of sequential ignorability and linear effects,β̂ζ̂ is the amount of adoption caused by mediating variable

de Brauw et al. REU Impact Pathways

Page 22: Alan de Brauw (and others) IFPRI "Bio-fortification, Crop Adaption and Health Information"

IntroductionBasic Findings

Causal MechanismsMarketing

Conclusion

Conceptual Framework

Summary: Causal Mechanism Results

We find that demand creation messages – narrowlydefined– did not affect adoption or consumptionAdoption behavior largely explains the amount of vitamin Aconsumed by young children, whether or not they arereference childrenSome unexplained variation in Uganda r.e. dietaryintakes– could be general health messages of project

de Brauw et al. REU Impact Pathways

Page 23: Alan de Brauw (and others) IFPRI "Bio-fortification, Crop Adaption and Health Information"

IntroductionBasic Findings

Causal MechanismsMarketing

Conclusion

Implications for Creating Value Chains: BiofortifiedProducts

For orange sweet potato to be part of value chain, reallyneed two components:

Market for vinesMarket for output (sweet potatoes) and marketable surplus

In both countries:People tend to obtain vines through neighbor exchange, notthrough marketsFarmers tended to grow small amounts of orange sweetpotatoNot enough produced by households for lots of marketedsurplus“Medium term” surveys demonstrate that output marketshave not really developed

de Brauw et al. REU Impact Pathways

Page 24: Alan de Brauw (and others) IFPRI "Bio-fortification, Crop Adaption and Health Information"

IntroductionBasic Findings

Causal MechanismsMarketing

Conclusion

Improved (?) Design to Promote Markets forBiofortified Products

Continue integrated design with seed systems, lightdemand creation approachBegin to try to build markets after the product is alreadybeing grownMarkets should cover both sides (vines and outputmarkets)

de Brauw et al. REU Impact Pathways

Page 25: Alan de Brauw (and others) IFPRI "Bio-fortification, Crop Adaption and Health Information"

IntroductionBasic Findings

Causal MechanismsMarketing

Conclusion

Conclusion

Large impacts of project, but no differences in impactsbetween Models 1 and 2 (heavy and light treatments)Little adoption attributable to detailed nutrition messagesSo hypothetical scale up of Model 2 could delay oreliminate marketing component, scale back demandcreation with little effect on primary impacts (vitamin Aconsumption)Can decrease costs substantially in hypothetical scale-up(larger reductions in Uganda than in Mozambique)

de Brauw et al. REU Impact Pathways


Recommended