{"title":"尼日利亚的土壤技术和收获后损失","authors":"Romanus Anthony Osabohien","doi":"10.1108/jadee-08-2022-0181","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposePost-harvest losses are becoming a huge issue worldwide and are predominantly severe in developing countries. Seeking ways to control post-harvest losses is important because losses decrease farm income by more than 15% for approximately 480 million small-scale farmers.Design/methodology/approachThe study engaged Wave 4 (2018/2019) of the Living Standards Measurement Studies–Integrated Survey on Agriculture, to examine the impact of soil technology such as fertilisers, herbicides, pesticides and certified crops on post-harvest losses in Nigeria. The study engaged descriptive statistics, logit regression and propensity score matching (PSM) to analyse the data.FindingsThe study found that approximately 38% of the household harvest was lost along the value chain. In addition, the results showed that among the indicators of soil technology, crop certification has a significant impact on the reduction of post-harvest losses. The implication is that from the nearest neighbour and kernel-based matching, the use of certified crops by households contributed to 1.62 and 1.36% reduction in post-harvest losses, respectively. In contrast, pesticide, herbicide and fertiliser use had no significant impact on post-harvest losses.Research limitations/implicationsOne of the limitations is that this study applied the PSM, the model did not account for endogeneity. Therefore, in examining this concept, further studies should consider applying other impact model such as the difference-in-difference to account for endogeneity.Originality/valueWhile previous studies have examined how ICT adoption, storage mechanisms and value chain among others help to minimise post-harvest losses, the aspect of how soil technology can reduce post-harvest losses has been a subject of exclusion in the extant literature. This study empirically examines the impact of soil technology adoption on post-harvest losses in Nigeria.","PeriodicalId":45976,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agribusiness in Developing and Emerging Economies","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Soil technology and post-harvest losses in Nigeria\",\"authors\":\"Romanus Anthony Osabohien\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/jadee-08-2022-0181\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"PurposePost-harvest losses are becoming a huge issue worldwide and are predominantly severe in developing countries. Seeking ways to control post-harvest losses is important because losses decrease farm income by more than 15% for approximately 480 million small-scale farmers.Design/methodology/approachThe study engaged Wave 4 (2018/2019) of the Living Standards Measurement Studies–Integrated Survey on Agriculture, to examine the impact of soil technology such as fertilisers, herbicides, pesticides and certified crops on post-harvest losses in Nigeria. The study engaged descriptive statistics, logit regression and propensity score matching (PSM) to analyse the data.FindingsThe study found that approximately 38% of the household harvest was lost along the value chain. In addition, the results showed that among the indicators of soil technology, crop certification has a significant impact on the reduction of post-harvest losses. The implication is that from the nearest neighbour and kernel-based matching, the use of certified crops by households contributed to 1.62 and 1.36% reduction in post-harvest losses, respectively. In contrast, pesticide, herbicide and fertiliser use had no significant impact on post-harvest losses.Research limitations/implicationsOne of the limitations is that this study applied the PSM, the model did not account for endogeneity. Therefore, in examining this concept, further studies should consider applying other impact model such as the difference-in-difference to account for endogeneity.Originality/valueWhile previous studies have examined how ICT adoption, storage mechanisms and value chain among others help to minimise post-harvest losses, the aspect of how soil technology can reduce post-harvest losses has been a subject of exclusion in the extant literature. This study empirically examines the impact of soil technology adoption on post-harvest losses in Nigeria.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45976,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Agribusiness in Developing and Emerging Economies\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Agribusiness in Developing and Emerging Economies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/jadee-08-2022-0181\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Agribusiness in Developing and Emerging Economies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jadee-08-2022-0181","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Soil technology and post-harvest losses in Nigeria
PurposePost-harvest losses are becoming a huge issue worldwide and are predominantly severe in developing countries. Seeking ways to control post-harvest losses is important because losses decrease farm income by more than 15% for approximately 480 million small-scale farmers.Design/methodology/approachThe study engaged Wave 4 (2018/2019) of the Living Standards Measurement Studies–Integrated Survey on Agriculture, to examine the impact of soil technology such as fertilisers, herbicides, pesticides and certified crops on post-harvest losses in Nigeria. The study engaged descriptive statistics, logit regression and propensity score matching (PSM) to analyse the data.FindingsThe study found that approximately 38% of the household harvest was lost along the value chain. In addition, the results showed that among the indicators of soil technology, crop certification has a significant impact on the reduction of post-harvest losses. The implication is that from the nearest neighbour and kernel-based matching, the use of certified crops by households contributed to 1.62 and 1.36% reduction in post-harvest losses, respectively. In contrast, pesticide, herbicide and fertiliser use had no significant impact on post-harvest losses.Research limitations/implicationsOne of the limitations is that this study applied the PSM, the model did not account for endogeneity. Therefore, in examining this concept, further studies should consider applying other impact model such as the difference-in-difference to account for endogeneity.Originality/valueWhile previous studies have examined how ICT adoption, storage mechanisms and value chain among others help to minimise post-harvest losses, the aspect of how soil technology can reduce post-harvest losses has been a subject of exclusion in the extant literature. This study empirically examines the impact of soil technology adoption on post-harvest losses in Nigeria.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Agribusiness in Developing and Emerging Economies publishes double-blind peer-reviewed research on issues relevant to agriculture and food value chain in emerging economies in Asia, Africa, Latin America and Eastern Europe. The journal welcomes original research, particularly empirical/applied, quantitative and qualitative work on topics pertaining to policies, processes, and practices in the agribusiness arena in emerging economies to inform researchers, practitioners and policy makers