Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Does Institutional Isolation Matter for Soil Conservation Decisions? Evidence From Kenya:

Does Institutional Isolation Matter for Soil Conservation Decisions? Evidence From Kenya: This article investigates the role of institutional isolation on the adoption of soil conservation technologies in Kenya. The study is based on the theory of induced technical and institutional innovations and on the literature on land tenure security and investment incentives. A multinomial logit model for adoption of various soil conservation investments (SCI) is estimated. To test whether institutional isolation affects soil conservation decisions, we evaluate the impacts of tenure security and market access, the impact of their interaction terms, and the significance of the joint impact of the two groups of variables and their interaction terms. The results show that the impact of development domains on soil conservation depends on the type of conservation investment. The results suggest that opening up of remote areas and educating farmers on appropriate land conservation technologies and farming systems suitable for different development domains are necessary for adoption of sustainable soil management practices. Keywords market access, tenure security, institutional isolation, soil conservation, development domains, Kenya Bromley, 2008). Adoption of soil conservation investments Introduction (SCI) is also influenced by development domains. Kenya is a low-income country that is dependent on agricul- There is growing research on factors driving adoption of tural production in several respects: as a key contributor to land conservation technologies (see Kabubo-Mariara, GDP (estimated at 25%); production of food for about 40 Linderhof, & Kruseman, 2010). There is also growing litera- million Kenyans; employment of about 65% of the Kenyan ture on the role of development domains on sustainable land population who live in rural areas, deriving their livelihoods management in Africa (see Pender, Ehui, & Place, 2006b). directly from the natural resource base; provision of raw There is, however, no attempt to analyze the impact of insti- materials for the industrial sector; and generating foreign tutional isolation on adoption of soil conservation practices. exchange earnings. Agricultural productivity is, however, This study addresses this research gap. The study is based on constrained by a number of factors: first are the development the premise that institutional isolation leads to disincentives domains of a locality, that is, the agroecological potential, to invest in soil conservation. The study hypothesizes that population density, market access, and institutional setting, although tenure security has been shown to be important for which are often unfavorable in remote areas; second, unsus- adoption of sustainable land management technologies, inte- tainable land management practices; third, climate and gration of market access and tenure security is particularly weather variability among other factors. crucial in less favored areas. The study tests this hypothesis Productivity is lowest in remote, marginally isolated by carrying out case studies from two districts in Kenya— regions of the country. Like in most African countries, some Machakos and Mbeere. regions of Kenya can be classified as suffering from institu- This article attempts to answer the following questions: tional isolation and decay in that institutions do not work as What are the key factors driving and conditioning adoption expected due to weak governance, resource constraints, and of SCI in Kenya? What is the role of institutional isolation in market imperfections among other factors. With institutional isolation, purchase of inputs and sale of outputs are con- strained by high information, contracting, and enforcement University of Nairobi, Kenya costs. Such costs prevent farmers from using purchased Corresponding Author: inputs in ideal quantities and thus hinder adoption of soil Jane Kabubo-Mariara, School of Economics, University of Nairobi, P.O. conservation technologies and reinforce the economic dys- Box 30197, 00100 Nairobi, Kenya. functionality of the system (Barrett & Swallow, 2007; Email: jane.mariara@gmail.com This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License Creative Commons CC BY: (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/) which permits any use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access page (http://www.uk.sagepub.com/aboutus/openaccess.htm). 2 SAGE Open adoption of SCI? What policy options can ensure adoption of (Boserup, 1965; Kabubo-Mariara, 2007; Tiffen et al., 1994). sustainable soil management practices in Kenya? Good soil quality and topography are expected to promote The rest of the article is structured as follows: The second adoption of SCI through increasing the marginal return and/ section presents the “Method,” the third section presents the or reducing the risks of inputs necessary for intensification “Study Setting and Data,” the fourth section presents the (Benin, 2006; Pender et al., 2004). Impact of agricultural “Results and Discussion,” and the fifth section is the potential on adoption of SCI could also be mixed (Kabubo- “Conclusion.” Mariara et al., 2010; Pender et al., 2006a). Favorable devel- opment domains promote adoption of SCI (Kruseman, Ruben, & Tesfay, 2006; Pender et al., 1999, 2006a). Method Access to agricultural extension groups and credit pro- grams provides farmers with information and may enable Conceptual Framework and Hypotheses them to purchase inputs and increased capital, input, and The analytical framework adopted in this article anchors on labor intensity (Kabubo-Mariara et al., 2010; Pender et al., the sustainable land management framework. This frame- 2006a). Adaptation of machinery and seeds as well as the work draws from the theories of induced technical and insti- capacity of farmers to invest in complementary inputs are tutional innovations in agriculture that explain changing also crucial for soil conservation (Bizoza, 2013; Ndah et al., management systems in terms of changing microeconomic 2015). incentives facing farmers as a result of changing relative fac- Farm size and labor endowments affect through opportu- tor endowments (Boserup, 1965; Pender et al., 2006b). The nities for intensification of SCI (Tesfaye et al., 2013). The study also draws from the literature on land tenure security impact of livestock on SCI depends on the interactions and investment incentives (Besley, 1995; Kabubo-Mariara, between crops and livestock. Farm equipment such as plows 2007; Pender, Ehui, & Place, 2006a). may contribute to soil erosion through tillage, especially if Based on the framework, theories, and the literature, the used on sloping lands. Farm equipment could, however, be study hypothesizes that adoption of soil conservation prac- used to help construct soil conservation structures or to apply tices/SCI is influenced by development domains, which inputs that help to prevent soil erosion, nutrient depletion, or determine the comparative advantage of a locality (Pender et other forms of degradation (Kabubo-Mariara, 2007; Pender al., 2006a). Other important factors include access to pro- et al., 2006a). grams and services (such as agricultural extension and credit), households’ endowment of physical assets, human Empirical Model capital, social capital, and natural capital. Market access is expected to affect SCI through increas- To achieve the objectives of the study, descriptive statistics ing farmers’ access to credit and facilitating capital intensity and econometric methods are used. First, we carry out bivari- of agriculture. Market-driven intensification may however ate comparisons of the two samples in terms of land tenure reduce fallowing, leading to land degradation unless suffi- contents, tenure security, other aspects of institutional set- ciently offset by adoption of more intensive soil fertility ting, and the socioeconomic characteristics of the house- management and SCI (Kabubo-Mariara et al., 2010; Pender holds. We further carry out econometric analysis of SCI. et al., 2006b; Tiffen, Mortimore, & Gichuki, 1994). Market Based on the conceptual framework and hypotheses, access may also influence adoption of SCI through access to adoption of SCI can be specified as information (Bromley, 2008). Information and awareness SCI =+ αβX + ε , about benefits of soil conservation and better land manage- ii ii ment practices is also important (Ndah et al., 2015; Tesfaye, Negatu, Brouwer, & van der Zaag, 2013). where SCI is a vector of current SCIs and α is a vector of Secure land rights can have substantial effects on adop- parameters to be estimated. X captures vectors of factors tion of SCI by regulating land use and land management influencing adoption of SCI and includes plot characteristics, decisions, and by affecting households’ incentive and ability tenure security of the plot, households’ endowments of phys- to invest in soil conservation (Besley, 1995; Kabubo-Mariara, ical capital, household human capital, financial capital, 2007; Pender, Nkonya, Jagger, Sserunkuuma, & Ssali, 2004). social capital, and village-level characteristics; ε is a random There is however no universally accepted definition of ten- error term and “i” refers to the plot owned by household j. ure security as the literature offers a wide range of definitions All other variables are as defined earlier. (Arnot, Luckert, & Boxall, 2011). In this study, tenure secu- rity is defined as the interaction between content and assur- Study Setting and Data ance aspects of tenure, which Arnot et al. (2011) suggested are highly correlated. This study is based on primary data collected from Machakos Population pressure may cause households to intensify and Mbeere districts of Eastern Province of Kenya. Machakos their use of labor and other inputs on the land and may also is historically referred to as a success story (Tiffen et al., induce innovations in technology, markets, and institutions 1994) and is thus assumed to be relatively less isolated Kabubo-Mariara 3 institutionally compared with Mbeere in terms of tenure Table 1. Characteristics of Household Heads. security and market access. Furthermore, Machakos is rela- Mbeere Machakos Full sample tively accessible due to proximity to the capital city, Nairobi, Variable M SD M SD M SD and also the Nairobi–Mombasa highway, but Mbeere district is less accessible, located more than 200 km from Nairobi Head is male 0.79 0.41 0.84 0.37 0.82 0.39 with most feeder roads virtually impassable during the heavy Age of head*** 45.72 14.89 49.31 15.12 47.60 15.10 rains. The districts are, however, fairly comparable in terms Number of years in school*** 7.78 4.20 8.64 3.87 8.23 4.05 Household size*** 4.33 1.75 4.72 2.02 4.53 1.90 of welfare, demographic characteristics, topography and cli- Dependency ratio* 0.34 0.24 0.31 0.23 0.33 0.24 mate, and agricultural potential. Highest level of education Household and community questionnaires were used to No education 0.08 0.27 0.08 0.27 0.08 0.26 collect the requisite data. The data were supplemented by Primary*** 0.65 0.48 0.47 0.50 0.55 0.50 secondary data on rainfall and village-level population den- Postprimary*** 0.28 0.45 0.46 0.50 0.37 0.48 sity. To ensure adequate representation of the selected zones, Main occupation the National Sample Survey and Evaluation Program Farming*** 0.80 0.40 0.69 0.46 0.74 0.44 Business 0.06 0.24 0.08 0.27 0.07 0.26 (NASSEP IV) frame of the Kenya National Bureau of Employed** 0.07 0.25 0.13 0.33 0.10 0.30 Statistics was used as the sampling frame for the field survey. Casual labor 0.07 0.26 0.11 0.31 0.09 0.29 Multistage random sampling methods were used to arrive at Sample size 251 271 528 the final sample of households for each district. The first stage involved selecting administrative divisions within each *Significant at 10%. **Significant at 5%. ***Significant at 1%—Differences in district means for two-sample t test with equal variances. district. A total of seven divisions were selected, three from Mbeere district and four from Machakos district. This choice was informed by diversity of the districts in terms of geogra- indicate that, on average, households expect that about 67% phy, agroecology, economic activities, physical size, and and 56% of the villagers in Machakos and Mbeere, respec- population density. The second stage involved selection of tively, would assist (Table 2). Other measures with signifi- locations and sublocations, which were also based on agro- cant differences included whether the respondent would ecological diversity. Five locations from each district and provide the same assistance to others, the number of confi- four and five sublocations were selected from Mbeere and dants, and participation in community projects. The results Machakos, respectively. The fourth stage involved selection suggest that households in Machakos are relatively richer in of sample points (clusters) from the NASSEP frame, which social capital than their counterparts in Mbeere district was based on the total number of clusters (each correspond- (Kabubo-Mariara, 2012, 2014). ing to a village) within a sublocation and the number of In this article, data collection focused on the content and households in each cluster. To arrive at the total number of assurance aspects of land tenure. Data were collected on the households actually visited, we took a probability sample mode of acquisition and expected land rights on all plots from each cluster making a total of 251 and 277 households owned, used, or rented/lent out by the household. The mode from Mbeere and Machakos districts, respectively. In addi- of acquisition probed on how the plot was acquired and in tion to the household survey, a community survey data set on whose name it was registered. We also probed perceptions on sources of market information and access, village infrastruc- transferability such as bequest and disposal rights and also ture, and prices of farm inputs and livestock was also used. for how long the land had been with the household. We also investigated perceptions on the likelihood of losing land to Results and Discussion someone else and whether anybody else had some stake on household land. Descriptive Results The data suggest that the average farm holdings are about 2 acres in the two districts, though a higher variability is The sample characteristics of all households are presented in observed in Machakos. The average distance to the plot in Table 1. The data suggest that differences between most of Machakos was twice as much as that in Mbeere. On land the household characteristics for the two districts are statisti- acquisition, for the whole sample, 62% of the plots were cally significant. Notable differences are observed for educa- inherited while 26% were purchased. Only 9% were rented. tion and the main occupation of the household head. Patterns of land acquisition suggest more secure modes in The data revealed no significant differences in household Machakos than in Mbeere district while a significantly higher assets in the two districts. Remittances were however higher proportion of land is registered outside the family (landlords in Machakos than in Mbeere, but a higher proportion of and other relatives) in Mbeere than in Machakos. Comparing households in Machakos received extension services than all measures of land acquisition and expected rights, the data their counterparts in Mbeere. On social capital, respondents suggest that, in general, households in Machakos have stron- were asked to indicate the proportion of villagers who are ger land rights than their counterparts in Mbeere district. likely to provide assistance in case of emergency. The results 4 SAGE Open Table 2. Household Assets and Incomes. Variable Mbeere Machakos Mean difference t-value Value of equipment 8,782.35 8,735.25 47.10 0.04 (−651.87) (−815.76) Value of livestock 23,604.71 27,594.22 −3,989.51 −0.95 (2,391.81) (3,346.43) Value of livestock products 188,735.5 248,691.3 −59,955.8 −0.67 (54,001.91) (70,477.86) Credit by (Kshs) 3,043.347 1,382.671 1,660.675 2.52*** (567.54) (358.46) Remittances (Kshs) 489.54 2,186. 53 −1,696.81 −1.41 (130.27) (1,137.52) Received any extension services 0.17 0.38 0.23 −1.80* (0.40) (0.43) Proportion likely to provide emergency assistance 55.50 67.17 −11.67 −5.49*** (24.23) (24.52) Participated in community projects last 12 months (1 = yes) 0.35 0.47 −0.12 −2.88*** (0.48) (0.50) *Significant at 10%. ***Significant at 1%. Standard deviations in parentheses. Table 3. Soil Conservation Investments. Variable Mbeere Machakos Mean difference t-value Any conservation on plot 0.76 0.84 −0.08 −2.97** (0.25) (0.18) Terraces 0.27 0.59 −0.32 −9.48*** (0.44) (0.49) Tree planting 0.70 0.48 0.22 6.38*** (0.46) (0.50) Ridging 0.15 0.29 −0.14 −4.91*** (0.35) (0.45) Grass strips 0.66 0.52 0.14 3.97*** (0.47) (0.50) Other investments 0.18 0.13 0.05 2.01** (0.38) (0.33) **Significant at 5%. ***Significant at 1%. Standard deviations in parentheses. The study sought information on all forms of soil conser- This study also sought detailed information on soil char- vation efforts and whether the investments were current (sea- acteristics; including the type, texture, depth of the soil, and sonal), long-term, or permanent investments. Eighty percent the perceived quality of soil. The data suggest that the soils of all plots had some form of SCI. The most common form of in the sampled plots were relatively deep and had relatively investment was grass strips and agroforestry (on about 58% easy to work out fertile soils of fine texture, but were rela- of all plots for each), followed by terracing (44% of all plots) tively highly erodible. Mean comparison tests suggest that and ridging (23% of all plots). Thirty-eight percent (38%) of soils in Machakos were significantly richer and more fertile all investments were current, 32% were long term, and the than those in Mbeere. The study also investigated market rest 26% were permanent investments. On average, the adop- access factors in the district, probing the distance and travel tion of SCI was higher in Machakos than in Mbeere (Table time to the nearest facility. Results for mean comparison tests 3). A significantly higher percentage of plots had current and for differences in distance to facilities between the two dis- permanent investments in Machakos than in Mbeere, but the tricts suggest that facilities and information are more acces- latter had more long-term investments. The most common sible in Machakos than in Mbeere districts (Table 4). types of investments in Machakos were terraces (59% of The results of the bivariate comparisons show that com- plots) and ridging (29%) while the most common types in pared with Mbeere district, households in Machakos are better Mbeere were agroforestry (70%) and grass strips (66%). endowed in assets, have stronger land rights, and participate Kabubo-Mariara 5 Table 4. Distance to Nearest Facility (Kilometers). Variable Machakos Mbeere Mean difference t-value Market 1.21 6.60 −5.38 −3.29*** (0.39) (4.21) Primary school 1.21 1.90 −0.69 −2.02** (0.39) (0.80) Secondary school 1.54 3.20 −1.66 −2.20** (0.42) (1.96) Travel time to market (minutes) 21.71 45.00 −23.29 −1.70* (8.10) (40.29) *Significant at 10%. **Significant at 5%. ***Significant at 1%. Standard deviations in parentheses. more in social capital formation. Furthermore, the results further made the assumption of Independence of Irrelevant suggest higher agricultural potential and better market access Alternatives (IIA) property. in Machakos. There is also higher adoption of SCI in The average marginal effects from the multinomial logit Machakos district. These results support the initial hypothe- model for adoption of SCI are presented in Table 5. The like- sis of better integrated market and tenure security in lihood ratio (LR) χ value suggests that the model fits the Machakos relative to Mbeere. We use multivariate regres- data better than an intercept only model. All the results sion analysis to test whether these differences translate into should be interpreted relative to the base category of non differences in adoption of SCI and crop productivity adoption of any conservation measure. For instance, the mar- outcomes. ginal effects imply that, on average, an increase in depen- dency ratio by 1 reduces the likelihood of adopting conservation practices, relative to nonadoption by between Econometric Results 0.03 and 0.07 points, other factors held constant. A higher To carry out the econometric analysis, the article starts by education grade is associated with a 0.025 points lower like- examining the correlation between different measures of lihood that a household will adopt terracing but 0.09 points market access and soil variables. Factor analysis is then used higher likelihood that a household will adopt grass strips, to derive the final factors for inclusion in the regression mod- relative to nonadoption of any measure. Other marginal els. For soil quality and characteristics, factor analysis is effects can be interpreted similarly. applied to responses on soil types, workability and texture of The results suggest that age of the farmer is inversely cor- the soil, and topography. The factor analysis loaded into eas- related with all forms of soil conservation and significant for ily workable (easy and fine) soils. Two market access vari- tree planting and adoption of grass strips. This is probably ables were derived from factor analysis: travel time and due to labor intensity of conservation, making them out of access to market information. reach for older farmers. Possession of a higher school grade To assess the impact of the hypothesized determinants on attainment reduces the probability of adoption of various soil conservation, a multinomial logit model for adoption of conservation practices (except ridging) by about 0.02 points. various SCI is estimated. This model is based on adoption of The results further suggest that relative to household heads terracing, tree planting (agroforestry), ridging, and grass who are farmers, being employed reduces the likelihood of strips relative to nonadoption of any conservation measure. adoption of terracing by 0.04 points but increases that of The study considered alternative estimation procedures for grass strips investments by 0.09 points analyzing the conservation decision: multinomial logit mod- In this article, tenure security is defined as an interaction els for adoption of various soil and water conservation mea- of content of tenure (strongest right on land-sell right) and sures, probit/logit models for the probability of investing in assurance (perception of low likelihood of expropriation). individual conservation measures, and ordinary least squares The results show that improved tenure security increases the (OLS) models for indices of SCI. The multinomial logit probability of adoption of grass strips relative to nonadop- regression is more appropriate than probit or logit models tion of any conservation investments by 0.063, all other fac- because the adoption decision, though nominal, consists of tors constant. The effect on adoption of other conservation more than two categories and the responses are not ordinal in practices is insignificant. Relative to plots with difficult nature as in ordered probit/logit. The OLS model results are soils, presence of easy and fine soils increases the likelihood difficult to interpret because of the nature of the dependent of adoption of terracing by 0.02 points but reduces the prob- variable. For these reasons, we retain the multinomial logit ability of adoption of tree planting by 0.035 points. There is model results. To run a multinomial logit model, choice was a 0.031 higher likelihood of adoption of ridging on plots per- made of the main type of investment on each plot to ensure ceived to have low levels of soil erosion. Longer distance to that the investments are mutually exclusive. The study plot increases the probability of adoption of terraces by 0.03 6 SAGE Open Table 5. Adoption of Various Soil Conservation Investments—Average Marginal Effects. Variables Terracing Tree planting Ridging Grass strips Household characteristics Dependency ratio −0.031*** −0.066 −0.037 −0.037*** Age of head 0.0002 −0.001*** 0.001 −0.003** Education grade attained −0.028** 0.019 −0.007 −0.024 Head is employed/business person −0.039** 0.039 −0.01 0.086* Tenure and other plot characteristics Tenure security −0.02 −0.013 −0.006 0.068*** Easy and fine soils 0.019* −0.032* 0.012 0.026 Nonerodible soils 0.012 −0.028** 0.031*** −0.011 Log distance to plot 0.032* 0.021 0.002 −0.135*** Household assets Log farm equipment 0.017 0.022* −0.015 0.044 Log value of livestock −0.018*** 0.001*** 0.004 0.006 Financial capital Log amount of remittance −0.003 0.013 0.005 −0.005 Household received extension services 0.039** 0.054** −0.040* 0.037 Social capital Proportion likely to assist in emergency −0.048 −0.064 0.012 0.291*** Proportion participating in collective action 0.019 −0.087** −0.025 0.054 Village level and market access variables Log population density 0.067*** 0.211** 0.095* 0.002* Log annual rainfall (mm) 0.038 0.191*** −0.121* 0.089* Travel time 0.001 −0.029*** −0.012 0.008 Access to market information 0.034 −0.030* 0.019 0.010 Tenure security and travel time −0.012 −0.043*** 0.006 0.046 Tenure security and access to information 0.055 −0.011 −0.042 0.0004 District (Machakos = 1) 0.117** −0.126** 0.07 0.143 Observations 793 LR χ (84) 477.98*** Log likelihood −910.98 Note. LR = likelihood ratio. *Significant at 10%. **Significant at 5%. ***Significant at 1%. but reduces the probability of adoption of grass strips by 0.14 action. These two measures of social capital are exogenous as points. the household has no control over the proportion of households Two asset variables are included to proxy the role of participating in social capital activities. The results show that household wealth on investment in soil conservation. The an increase in the proportion willing to assist in emergencies assets also reflect the type of farming practices, which influ- raises the probability of adoption by between 0.002 and 0.046 ence the type of conservation practices adopted. More farm points. A higher proportion participating in collective action equipment increases the probability of adoption of various reduces the likelihood of adoption of tree planting by 0.096 but forms of soil conservation measures by between 0.02 and raises the probably of adoption of all other practices. 0.05 points. Only the marginal effect on tree planting is sig- Village-level and market access variables are presented in nificant. Higher value of livestock lowers the probability of the last panel of Table 5. The results show that higher popula- adoption of SCI, but the impact is insignificant for ridging tion density increases the likelihood of adoption of all soil con- and grass stripping. servation measures relative to nonadoption of any practice by The analysis uncovers no significant effect of remittances between 0.002 and 0.211 points. The highest marginal impact on adoption of SCI. Access to agricultural extension ser- is on tree planting, while population density seems to matter vices, however, increases the likelihood of adoption by least for adoption of grass strips. Rainfall increases the proba- between 0.01 and 0.05 points. The marginal impact is signifi- bility of adoption of tree planting and grass strips by 0.191 and cant for adoption of terracing and grass strips. 0.089 points, respectively, relative to nonadoption of any con- Social capital is captured by the proportion of households in servation practice. Higher rainfall is however inversely corre- a village that are likely to assist one another in cases of emer- lated with the probability of adoption of ridging relative to gency and the proportion of persons participating in collective nonadoption, with an average marginal impact of 0.121. Kabubo-Mariara 7 Table 6. Joint Impact of Institutional Isolation and Development (last column of Table 6). An improvement in development Domains. domains by 1% would reduce the probability of adoption of tree planting by 0.34 % and that of adopting grass strips by Tenure security and Development 0.23%. A similar change would increase the likelihood of Model market access domains adoption of terraces and ridges by 0.01% and 0.30%, respec- Terracing 0.1600*** 0.0121*** tively. The impact on the likelihood of adoption of soil con- Tree planting 0.0630*** −0.3432*** servation in general is positive and statistically significant Ridging 0.0718* 0.3017** but quite modest. Grass strips 0.1921*** −0.2312*** Last, we include a dummy variable for Machakos district Conservation 0.0246 0.0320* to test whether location in a particular district influences adoption of SCI. The results show that farmers in Machakos *Significant at 10%. **Significant at 5%. ***Significant at 1%. district have a higher probability of adopting terraces than their counterparts in Mbeere district. However, these farmers Market access is measured by two factors: travel time and have a lower probability of planting trees than farmers in access to market information. Increased travel time, a mea- Mbeere. The results support the statistically significant dif- sure of distance/remoteness, reduces the probability of tree ference in adoption of these practices in the two districts pre- planting relative to nonadoption of any conservation invest- sented in Table 4. We uncover no significant effect of the ment by 0.051. The marginal impacts on adoption of other district dummy on probability of adoption of ridges and grass conservation investments are insignificant. Access to market strips (Table 5). information has a positive impact, which is only significant for adoption of grass strips. An increase in access to informa- Discussion tion by one more unit increases the probability of adoption of This article investigates the role of institutional isolation on grass strips by 0.028 relative to nonadoption of any conser- adoption of soil conservation in Kenya. The study is based vation measure, all other factors held constant. on the expectation that integration of market access and ten- The main hypothesis of this study was that integration of ure security is crucial for adoption of SCI. The results point tenure security and market access is important for adoption at several key factors that affect soil conservation decisions: of SCI. Though individual impacts of some of the indicators tenure security, market access, and development domains. of these two factors suggest that both tenure security and The results show that tenure security exhibits positive market access are important and significant determinants of impacts on adoption of all SCI, relative to all other forms of conservation, we test for their joint impact by including conservation. This supports literature that has found tenure interaction terms of tenure security and travel time, and also security to provide incentives for soil conservation (Kabubo- tenure security and access to market information. The results Mariara, 2007). Except for tree planting, there is a higher suggest that an interaction of tenure security and travel time likelihood of adoption of SCI on plots with easy and fine to facility (remoteness) is inversely correlated with adoption soils, compared with plots with difficult soils. There is also a of terraces and tree planting but positive for ridging and significantly higher likelihood of adoption of ridging on grass strips. Only the impacts for tree planting and grass plots that are perceived to have low levels of soil erosion strips are significant. The results of interaction seem to be while tree planting is less likely to occur on nonerodible driven by the relative strengths of the impacts of individual soils. The mixed results find support in Pender et al. (2006a), factors. For terraces and tree planting, the negative impact of who argued of expected ambiguous impacts of agricultural travel time outweighs the positive impact of tenure security, potential on land degradation. Kabubo-Mariara et al. (2010) while the reverse is observed for ridging and grass strips. also found mixed impacts of soil quality on adoption of soil We further re-examine the key hypothesis of the study by conservation. The negative significant marginal effect of dis- evaluating the significance of the joint marginal impacts of tance to plot on adoption of grass strips suggests that tenure security, market access variables, and their interaction increased production costs (time wise) will hinder adoption terms (institutional isolation). The results (Table 6) show that of sustainable land management practices (Gebremedhin & institutional isolation has a positive significant effect of Swinton, 2003; Kabubo-Mariara et al., 2010; Kruseman et adoption of all land conservation investments. The impact is al., 2006). relatively higher for adoption of terraces and grass stripping. On market access, the inverse relationship between travel The joint marginal impact of integration on terracing is 0.16. time and adoption of conservation investments on one hand, This suggests that a reduction in the extent of institutional and the positive impact of access to market information on isolation by 1% would boost adoption of soil conservation by adoption of grass strips on the other, suggests that institu- about 16%, ceteris paribus. Other results can be interpreted tional isolation will hinder adoption of SCI through higher in a similar manner. transaction costs. The results suggest that an interaction of We test for the impact of development domains by carry- tenure security and travel time to facility (remoteness) ing out statistical tests for the three groups of variables: agri- encourages adoption of grass strips but discourages tree cultural potential, market access, and population pressure 8 SAGE Open planting. Evaluation of the joint significance of tenure secu- adoption of SCI, three alternative approaches are utilized. rity and market access suggests that integration of tenure First we evaluate the impacts of tenure security and market security and good market access incentivize adoption of soil access. Second, we evaluate the impact of interaction terms conservation but favor more permanent investments (adop- of tenure and market access variables. Third, we evaluate the tion of terraces and grass strips) in soil conservation. This significance of the joint impact of the two groups of vari- supports the key hypothesis of this study. The joint impact of ables and their interaction terms. development domain dimensions is most pronounced on The results show that tenure security positively influences adoption of tree planting and ridging. Favorable develop- the decision to adopt and also the forms of SCI adopted. ment domains boost adoption of terraces and ridges but dis- Results for market access factors and distance to plot suggest courage tree planting and adoption of grass strips. This that remoteness is inversely correlated with adoption of SCI, implies that the impact of development domains depends on supporting our hypothesis on the role of institutional isola- the type of conservation practice. The impact on the likeli- tion in adoption of SCI. Integration of tenure security and hood of adoption of conservation investments, in general, market access boosts adoption of all conservation invest- supports the hypothesis that favorable development domains ments but has a larger impact on adoption of terraces and boosts adoption of SCI. grass stripping. Population density exhibits positive signifi- Population density exhibits positive significant impacts cant impacts on adoption of all SCI, supporting the on adoption of all SCI. This supports Boserup’s hypothesis Boserupian hypothesis of increased agricultural intensifica- of increased agricultural intensification as population density tion as population density increases. The impact of develop- increases (Boserup, 1965; Kabubo-Mariara, 2007; Pender et ment domains depends on the type on conservation practice, al., 2006a). The positive impact of rainfall concurs with the favoring adoption of terraces and ridging but inversely hypothesis that higher rainfall areas are associated with affecting tree planting and grass strips. greater adoption of vegetative land management practices The findings of this study suggest that institutional isola- such as use of agroforestry, live barriers, and mulching tion is important for adoption of soil conservation technolo- because of higher biomass productivity in such areas (Pender gies. It is therefore important to open up remote areas to et al., 2006a). The Machakos district dummy suggests that facilitate adoption of alternative SCI. Enhancing security of farmers in Machakos are generally more likely to adopt soil tenure is also crucial for promoting long-term investments in conservation practices than their counterparts in Mbeere dis- soil conservation. The impact of development domains is trict. The only exception is for tree planting where we find a found to be context specific. This requires dissemination of negative significant average marginal effect. This result sup- information to farmers on appropriate land conservation ports Tiffen et al. (1994) and our earlier hypothesis that technologies and farming systems appropriate in different Machakos district may be associated with higher adoption of domains. Research into the relative differentials in the soil conservation measures as it is less isolated institutionally responsiveness of adoption of soil conservation to the com- relative to Mbeere district (Kabubo-Mariara, 2012, 2014). ponents of development domains in different regions of the The richer the social capital, the higher the likelihood of country should form an important source of information for adoption of SCI. This supports development policy view that dissemination to farmers. Experiences of what works/does social capital is a productive asset that can be strategically not work in other regions should also be an integral part of mobilized by individuals for particular ends (Nyangena & this research and dissemination strategy. Sterner, 2009). Literature suggests that collective action for This study makes an important contribution to the litera- natural resource management can mitigate the negative influ- ture on institutional economics. However, given data limita- ence of population pressure on natural resource management tions, there are some important issues that could not be drawn as predicted by the Malthusian perspective (Kabubo-Mariara, into this study. First, further research is needed to investigate 2012, 2014; Pender et al., 2006b). the impact of institutional isolation on adoption of water con- servation technologies in Kenya. Second, there is need for research that incorporates technological spillovers when Conclusion assessing the impact of institutional isolation on adoption of The study investigates whether soil conservation responds to SCI. Third, studies on adoption of SCI do not take into institutional isolation. It draws from the sustainable land account land prices, yet it is probable that farmers practice management framework and the literature on tenure security soil conservation because their land is valuable and they incentives. The study is based on 793 plots from a sample of want to maintain such land values. Future studies should try 528 households drawn from Mbeere and Machakos districts to incorporate land prices. Fourth, there is need to try to esti- of Eastern Province of Kenya. A community survey is used mate the overall financial and time efforts by farmers to augment the household survey. for SCI. Descriptive and econometric methods are used to test the Author’s Note study hypothesis. Multinomial logit models are estimated for adoption of various SCI. To test the hypothesis that integra- Comments from CEEPA resources persons are acknowledged. I am tion of tenure security and market access is important for however responsible for any errors and omissions. Kabubo-Mariara 9 Declaration of Conflicting Interests Kabubo-Mariara, J. (2012). Institutional isolation, soil conservation and crop productivity: Evidence from Machakos and Mbeere The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect districts in Kenya. African Journal of Social Sciences, 2(3), to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. 1-26. Kabubo-Mariara, J. (2014). Integrating market access and tenure Funding security: The role of institutional isolation in crop productiv- The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support ity in Kenya. International Journal of Economic Perspectives, for the research and/or authorship of this article: This research was 8(1), 85-111. funded by the Centre of Environmental Economics and Policy in Kabubo-Mariara, J., Linderhof, V., & Kruseman, G. (2010). Does Africa (CEEPA). land tenure security matter for investment in soil and water conservation? Evidence from Kenya. African Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 4, 123-139. Notes Kruseman, G., Ruben, R., & Tesfay, G. (2006). Village stratifica- 1. Institutional isolation refers to lack of coherence or harmony tion for policy analysis: Multiple development domains in the in the structured set of ordered relations that define individual Ethiopian highlands of Tigray. In J. Pender, S. Ehui, & F. Place expectation and behavior. A coherent institutional regime is (Eds.), Strategies for sustainable land management in the East one that serves to secure expectations so that forward look- African highlands, pp 81-106. Washington, DC: International ing behavior is facilitated (Bromley, 2008). In this article, we Food Policy Research Institute. define institutional isolation as lack of coherence between Ndah, H. T., Schuler, J., Uthes, S., Zander, P., Triomphe, B., market access and tenure security. Mkomwa, S., & Corbeels, M. (2015). Adoption poten- 2. Adoption of soil conservation investments (SCI) is a form of tial for conservation agriculture in Africa: A newly devel- land management system, and long-term SCI measures can be oped assessment approach (QAToCA) applied in Kenya and seen as sustainable land management practices. Tanzania. Land Degradation & Development., 26,2,133-141. 3. Initial regressions included membership in village groups, doi:10.1002/ldr.2191 trust, and also an aggregate social capital index. The results Nyangena, W. N., & Sterner, T. (2009). Social and rural institu- suggested that both measures are positively correlated with tions in Kenya. Is Machakos unique? Chinese Business Review, conservation. These variables are, however, potentially endog- 8(10), 1-18. enous. Attempts at instrumentation of these variables became Pender, J., Place, F., & Ehui, S. (1999). Strategies for Sustainable problematic, and no meaningful results were obtained. For this Agricultural Development in the East African Highlands. reason, they were dropped from the soil conservation model. Environment and Production Technology Division Discussion Paper No. 41. International Food Policy Research References Institute.Washington, D.C. Arnot, C., Luckert, M. K., & Boxall, P. C. (2011). What is tenure Pender, J., Ehui, S., & Place, F. (2006a). Conceptual framework and security? Conceptual implications for empirical analysis. Land hypotheses. In J. Pender, S. Ehui, & F. Place (Eds.), Strategies Economics, 87, 297-311. for sustainable land management in the East African high- Barrett, C. B., & Swallow, B. M. (2007). Fractal poverty traps. lands, pp 31-58. Washington, DC: International Food Policy World Development, 34, 1-15. Research Institute. Benin, S. (2006). Policies and Programs Affecting Land Pender, J., Ehui, S., & Place, F. (2006b). Strategies for sustainable Management Practices, Input Use, and Productivity in the land management in the East African highlands. Washington, Highlands of Amhara Region, Ethiopia. In Pender J., S. Ehui & DC: International Food Policy Research Institute. F. Place (Eds.), Strategies for Sustainable Land Management in Pender, J., Nkonya, E., Jagger, P., Sserunkuuma, D., & Ssali, H. the East African Highlands. International Food Policy Research (2004). Strategies to increase agricultural productivity and Institute. Washington D.C. reduce land degradation: Evidence from Uganda. Agricultural Besley, T. (1995). Property rights and investment incentives: Theory and Economics, 31, 181-195. evidence from Ghana. Journal of Political Economy, 103, 903-937. Tesfaye, A., Negatu, W., Brouwer, R., & van der Zaag, P. (2013). Bizoza, A. R. (2013). Three-stage analysis of the adoption of soil Understanding soil conservation decision of farmers in the and water conservation in the highlands of Rwanda. Land Gedeb watershed, Ethiopia. Land Degradation & Development, Degradation & Development, 25, 360-372. doi:10.1002/ldr.2145 25, 71-79. doi:10.1002/ldr.2187 Boserup, E. (1965). The conditions of agricultural growth: The eco- Tiffen, M., Mortimore, M., & Gichuki, F. (1994). More people, less nomics of agrarian change under population pressure. New erosion: Environmental recovery in Kenya. Chichester, UK: York, NY: Aldine Press. John Wiley. Bromley, D. (2008). Resource degradation in the African com- mons: Accounting for institutional decay. Environment and Author Biography Development Economics, 13, 539-563. Gebremedhin, B., & Swinton, S. M. (2003). Investment in soil con- Jane Kabubo-Mariara is a Professor of Economics and current servation in Northern Ethiopia: The role of land tenure security Director of the School of Economics, University of Nairobi, Kenya. and public programs. Agricultural Economics, 29, 69-84. Her key research interests include the impact (and adaptations) of Kabubo-Mariara, J. (2007). Land conservation and tenure secu- climate change on agriculture; environmental and natural resource rity in Kenya: Boserup’s hypothesis revisited. Ecological economics; and poverty and income distribution issues, with Economics, 64, 25-35. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.06.007 emphasis on multiple dimensions of child poverty. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png SAGE Open SAGE

Does Institutional Isolation Matter for Soil Conservation Decisions? Evidence From Kenya:

SAGE Open , Volume 5 (1): 1 – Feb 11, 2015

Loading next page...
 
/lp/sage/does-institutional-isolation-matter-for-soil-conservation-decisions-LuMDD0oAJE

References (26)

Publisher
SAGE
Copyright
Copyright © 2022 by SAGE Publications Inc, unless otherwise noted. Manuscript content on this site is licensed under Creative Commons Licenses.
ISSN
2158-2440
eISSN
2158-2440
DOI
10.1177/2158244015570977
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

This article investigates the role of institutional isolation on the adoption of soil conservation technologies in Kenya. The study is based on the theory of induced technical and institutional innovations and on the literature on land tenure security and investment incentives. A multinomial logit model for adoption of various soil conservation investments (SCI) is estimated. To test whether institutional isolation affects soil conservation decisions, we evaluate the impacts of tenure security and market access, the impact of their interaction terms, and the significance of the joint impact of the two groups of variables and their interaction terms. The results show that the impact of development domains on soil conservation depends on the type of conservation investment. The results suggest that opening up of remote areas and educating farmers on appropriate land conservation technologies and farming systems suitable for different development domains are necessary for adoption of sustainable soil management practices. Keywords market access, tenure security, institutional isolation, soil conservation, development domains, Kenya Bromley, 2008). Adoption of soil conservation investments Introduction (SCI) is also influenced by development domains. Kenya is a low-income country that is dependent on agricul- There is growing research on factors driving adoption of tural production in several respects: as a key contributor to land conservation technologies (see Kabubo-Mariara, GDP (estimated at 25%); production of food for about 40 Linderhof, & Kruseman, 2010). There is also growing litera- million Kenyans; employment of about 65% of the Kenyan ture on the role of development domains on sustainable land population who live in rural areas, deriving their livelihoods management in Africa (see Pender, Ehui, & Place, 2006b). directly from the natural resource base; provision of raw There is, however, no attempt to analyze the impact of insti- materials for the industrial sector; and generating foreign tutional isolation on adoption of soil conservation practices. exchange earnings. Agricultural productivity is, however, This study addresses this research gap. The study is based on constrained by a number of factors: first are the development the premise that institutional isolation leads to disincentives domains of a locality, that is, the agroecological potential, to invest in soil conservation. The study hypothesizes that population density, market access, and institutional setting, although tenure security has been shown to be important for which are often unfavorable in remote areas; second, unsus- adoption of sustainable land management technologies, inte- tainable land management practices; third, climate and gration of market access and tenure security is particularly weather variability among other factors. crucial in less favored areas. The study tests this hypothesis Productivity is lowest in remote, marginally isolated by carrying out case studies from two districts in Kenya— regions of the country. Like in most African countries, some Machakos and Mbeere. regions of Kenya can be classified as suffering from institu- This article attempts to answer the following questions: tional isolation and decay in that institutions do not work as What are the key factors driving and conditioning adoption expected due to weak governance, resource constraints, and of SCI in Kenya? What is the role of institutional isolation in market imperfections among other factors. With institutional isolation, purchase of inputs and sale of outputs are con- strained by high information, contracting, and enforcement University of Nairobi, Kenya costs. Such costs prevent farmers from using purchased Corresponding Author: inputs in ideal quantities and thus hinder adoption of soil Jane Kabubo-Mariara, School of Economics, University of Nairobi, P.O. conservation technologies and reinforce the economic dys- Box 30197, 00100 Nairobi, Kenya. functionality of the system (Barrett & Swallow, 2007; Email: jane.mariara@gmail.com This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License Creative Commons CC BY: (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/) which permits any use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access page (http://www.uk.sagepub.com/aboutus/openaccess.htm). 2 SAGE Open adoption of SCI? What policy options can ensure adoption of (Boserup, 1965; Kabubo-Mariara, 2007; Tiffen et al., 1994). sustainable soil management practices in Kenya? Good soil quality and topography are expected to promote The rest of the article is structured as follows: The second adoption of SCI through increasing the marginal return and/ section presents the “Method,” the third section presents the or reducing the risks of inputs necessary for intensification “Study Setting and Data,” the fourth section presents the (Benin, 2006; Pender et al., 2004). Impact of agricultural “Results and Discussion,” and the fifth section is the potential on adoption of SCI could also be mixed (Kabubo- “Conclusion.” Mariara et al., 2010; Pender et al., 2006a). Favorable devel- opment domains promote adoption of SCI (Kruseman, Ruben, & Tesfay, 2006; Pender et al., 1999, 2006a). Method Access to agricultural extension groups and credit pro- grams provides farmers with information and may enable Conceptual Framework and Hypotheses them to purchase inputs and increased capital, input, and The analytical framework adopted in this article anchors on labor intensity (Kabubo-Mariara et al., 2010; Pender et al., the sustainable land management framework. This frame- 2006a). Adaptation of machinery and seeds as well as the work draws from the theories of induced technical and insti- capacity of farmers to invest in complementary inputs are tutional innovations in agriculture that explain changing also crucial for soil conservation (Bizoza, 2013; Ndah et al., management systems in terms of changing microeconomic 2015). incentives facing farmers as a result of changing relative fac- Farm size and labor endowments affect through opportu- tor endowments (Boserup, 1965; Pender et al., 2006b). The nities for intensification of SCI (Tesfaye et al., 2013). The study also draws from the literature on land tenure security impact of livestock on SCI depends on the interactions and investment incentives (Besley, 1995; Kabubo-Mariara, between crops and livestock. Farm equipment such as plows 2007; Pender, Ehui, & Place, 2006a). may contribute to soil erosion through tillage, especially if Based on the framework, theories, and the literature, the used on sloping lands. Farm equipment could, however, be study hypothesizes that adoption of soil conservation prac- used to help construct soil conservation structures or to apply tices/SCI is influenced by development domains, which inputs that help to prevent soil erosion, nutrient depletion, or determine the comparative advantage of a locality (Pender et other forms of degradation (Kabubo-Mariara, 2007; Pender al., 2006a). Other important factors include access to pro- et al., 2006a). grams and services (such as agricultural extension and credit), households’ endowment of physical assets, human Empirical Model capital, social capital, and natural capital. Market access is expected to affect SCI through increas- To achieve the objectives of the study, descriptive statistics ing farmers’ access to credit and facilitating capital intensity and econometric methods are used. First, we carry out bivari- of agriculture. Market-driven intensification may however ate comparisons of the two samples in terms of land tenure reduce fallowing, leading to land degradation unless suffi- contents, tenure security, other aspects of institutional set- ciently offset by adoption of more intensive soil fertility ting, and the socioeconomic characteristics of the house- management and SCI (Kabubo-Mariara et al., 2010; Pender holds. We further carry out econometric analysis of SCI. et al., 2006b; Tiffen, Mortimore, & Gichuki, 1994). Market Based on the conceptual framework and hypotheses, access may also influence adoption of SCI through access to adoption of SCI can be specified as information (Bromley, 2008). Information and awareness SCI =+ αβX + ε , about benefits of soil conservation and better land manage- ii ii ment practices is also important (Ndah et al., 2015; Tesfaye, Negatu, Brouwer, & van der Zaag, 2013). where SCI is a vector of current SCIs and α is a vector of Secure land rights can have substantial effects on adop- parameters to be estimated. X captures vectors of factors tion of SCI by regulating land use and land management influencing adoption of SCI and includes plot characteristics, decisions, and by affecting households’ incentive and ability tenure security of the plot, households’ endowments of phys- to invest in soil conservation (Besley, 1995; Kabubo-Mariara, ical capital, household human capital, financial capital, 2007; Pender, Nkonya, Jagger, Sserunkuuma, & Ssali, 2004). social capital, and village-level characteristics; ε is a random There is however no universally accepted definition of ten- error term and “i” refers to the plot owned by household j. ure security as the literature offers a wide range of definitions All other variables are as defined earlier. (Arnot, Luckert, & Boxall, 2011). In this study, tenure secu- rity is defined as the interaction between content and assur- Study Setting and Data ance aspects of tenure, which Arnot et al. (2011) suggested are highly correlated. This study is based on primary data collected from Machakos Population pressure may cause households to intensify and Mbeere districts of Eastern Province of Kenya. Machakos their use of labor and other inputs on the land and may also is historically referred to as a success story (Tiffen et al., induce innovations in technology, markets, and institutions 1994) and is thus assumed to be relatively less isolated Kabubo-Mariara 3 institutionally compared with Mbeere in terms of tenure Table 1. Characteristics of Household Heads. security and market access. Furthermore, Machakos is rela- Mbeere Machakos Full sample tively accessible due to proximity to the capital city, Nairobi, Variable M SD M SD M SD and also the Nairobi–Mombasa highway, but Mbeere district is less accessible, located more than 200 km from Nairobi Head is male 0.79 0.41 0.84 0.37 0.82 0.39 with most feeder roads virtually impassable during the heavy Age of head*** 45.72 14.89 49.31 15.12 47.60 15.10 rains. The districts are, however, fairly comparable in terms Number of years in school*** 7.78 4.20 8.64 3.87 8.23 4.05 Household size*** 4.33 1.75 4.72 2.02 4.53 1.90 of welfare, demographic characteristics, topography and cli- Dependency ratio* 0.34 0.24 0.31 0.23 0.33 0.24 mate, and agricultural potential. Highest level of education Household and community questionnaires were used to No education 0.08 0.27 0.08 0.27 0.08 0.26 collect the requisite data. The data were supplemented by Primary*** 0.65 0.48 0.47 0.50 0.55 0.50 secondary data on rainfall and village-level population den- Postprimary*** 0.28 0.45 0.46 0.50 0.37 0.48 sity. To ensure adequate representation of the selected zones, Main occupation the National Sample Survey and Evaluation Program Farming*** 0.80 0.40 0.69 0.46 0.74 0.44 Business 0.06 0.24 0.08 0.27 0.07 0.26 (NASSEP IV) frame of the Kenya National Bureau of Employed** 0.07 0.25 0.13 0.33 0.10 0.30 Statistics was used as the sampling frame for the field survey. Casual labor 0.07 0.26 0.11 0.31 0.09 0.29 Multistage random sampling methods were used to arrive at Sample size 251 271 528 the final sample of households for each district. The first stage involved selecting administrative divisions within each *Significant at 10%. **Significant at 5%. ***Significant at 1%—Differences in district means for two-sample t test with equal variances. district. A total of seven divisions were selected, three from Mbeere district and four from Machakos district. This choice was informed by diversity of the districts in terms of geogra- indicate that, on average, households expect that about 67% phy, agroecology, economic activities, physical size, and and 56% of the villagers in Machakos and Mbeere, respec- population density. The second stage involved selection of tively, would assist (Table 2). Other measures with signifi- locations and sublocations, which were also based on agro- cant differences included whether the respondent would ecological diversity. Five locations from each district and provide the same assistance to others, the number of confi- four and five sublocations were selected from Mbeere and dants, and participation in community projects. The results Machakos, respectively. The fourth stage involved selection suggest that households in Machakos are relatively richer in of sample points (clusters) from the NASSEP frame, which social capital than their counterparts in Mbeere district was based on the total number of clusters (each correspond- (Kabubo-Mariara, 2012, 2014). ing to a village) within a sublocation and the number of In this article, data collection focused on the content and households in each cluster. To arrive at the total number of assurance aspects of land tenure. Data were collected on the households actually visited, we took a probability sample mode of acquisition and expected land rights on all plots from each cluster making a total of 251 and 277 households owned, used, or rented/lent out by the household. The mode from Mbeere and Machakos districts, respectively. In addi- of acquisition probed on how the plot was acquired and in tion to the household survey, a community survey data set on whose name it was registered. We also probed perceptions on sources of market information and access, village infrastruc- transferability such as bequest and disposal rights and also ture, and prices of farm inputs and livestock was also used. for how long the land had been with the household. We also investigated perceptions on the likelihood of losing land to Results and Discussion someone else and whether anybody else had some stake on household land. Descriptive Results The data suggest that the average farm holdings are about 2 acres in the two districts, though a higher variability is The sample characteristics of all households are presented in observed in Machakos. The average distance to the plot in Table 1. The data suggest that differences between most of Machakos was twice as much as that in Mbeere. On land the household characteristics for the two districts are statisti- acquisition, for the whole sample, 62% of the plots were cally significant. Notable differences are observed for educa- inherited while 26% were purchased. Only 9% were rented. tion and the main occupation of the household head. Patterns of land acquisition suggest more secure modes in The data revealed no significant differences in household Machakos than in Mbeere district while a significantly higher assets in the two districts. Remittances were however higher proportion of land is registered outside the family (landlords in Machakos than in Mbeere, but a higher proportion of and other relatives) in Mbeere than in Machakos. Comparing households in Machakos received extension services than all measures of land acquisition and expected rights, the data their counterparts in Mbeere. On social capital, respondents suggest that, in general, households in Machakos have stron- were asked to indicate the proportion of villagers who are ger land rights than their counterparts in Mbeere district. likely to provide assistance in case of emergency. The results 4 SAGE Open Table 2. Household Assets and Incomes. Variable Mbeere Machakos Mean difference t-value Value of equipment 8,782.35 8,735.25 47.10 0.04 (−651.87) (−815.76) Value of livestock 23,604.71 27,594.22 −3,989.51 −0.95 (2,391.81) (3,346.43) Value of livestock products 188,735.5 248,691.3 −59,955.8 −0.67 (54,001.91) (70,477.86) Credit by (Kshs) 3,043.347 1,382.671 1,660.675 2.52*** (567.54) (358.46) Remittances (Kshs) 489.54 2,186. 53 −1,696.81 −1.41 (130.27) (1,137.52) Received any extension services 0.17 0.38 0.23 −1.80* (0.40) (0.43) Proportion likely to provide emergency assistance 55.50 67.17 −11.67 −5.49*** (24.23) (24.52) Participated in community projects last 12 months (1 = yes) 0.35 0.47 −0.12 −2.88*** (0.48) (0.50) *Significant at 10%. ***Significant at 1%. Standard deviations in parentheses. Table 3. Soil Conservation Investments. Variable Mbeere Machakos Mean difference t-value Any conservation on plot 0.76 0.84 −0.08 −2.97** (0.25) (0.18) Terraces 0.27 0.59 −0.32 −9.48*** (0.44) (0.49) Tree planting 0.70 0.48 0.22 6.38*** (0.46) (0.50) Ridging 0.15 0.29 −0.14 −4.91*** (0.35) (0.45) Grass strips 0.66 0.52 0.14 3.97*** (0.47) (0.50) Other investments 0.18 0.13 0.05 2.01** (0.38) (0.33) **Significant at 5%. ***Significant at 1%. Standard deviations in parentheses. The study sought information on all forms of soil conser- This study also sought detailed information on soil char- vation efforts and whether the investments were current (sea- acteristics; including the type, texture, depth of the soil, and sonal), long-term, or permanent investments. Eighty percent the perceived quality of soil. The data suggest that the soils of all plots had some form of SCI. The most common form of in the sampled plots were relatively deep and had relatively investment was grass strips and agroforestry (on about 58% easy to work out fertile soils of fine texture, but were rela- of all plots for each), followed by terracing (44% of all plots) tively highly erodible. Mean comparison tests suggest that and ridging (23% of all plots). Thirty-eight percent (38%) of soils in Machakos were significantly richer and more fertile all investments were current, 32% were long term, and the than those in Mbeere. The study also investigated market rest 26% were permanent investments. On average, the adop- access factors in the district, probing the distance and travel tion of SCI was higher in Machakos than in Mbeere (Table time to the nearest facility. Results for mean comparison tests 3). A significantly higher percentage of plots had current and for differences in distance to facilities between the two dis- permanent investments in Machakos than in Mbeere, but the tricts suggest that facilities and information are more acces- latter had more long-term investments. The most common sible in Machakos than in Mbeere districts (Table 4). types of investments in Machakos were terraces (59% of The results of the bivariate comparisons show that com- plots) and ridging (29%) while the most common types in pared with Mbeere district, households in Machakos are better Mbeere were agroforestry (70%) and grass strips (66%). endowed in assets, have stronger land rights, and participate Kabubo-Mariara 5 Table 4. Distance to Nearest Facility (Kilometers). Variable Machakos Mbeere Mean difference t-value Market 1.21 6.60 −5.38 −3.29*** (0.39) (4.21) Primary school 1.21 1.90 −0.69 −2.02** (0.39) (0.80) Secondary school 1.54 3.20 −1.66 −2.20** (0.42) (1.96) Travel time to market (minutes) 21.71 45.00 −23.29 −1.70* (8.10) (40.29) *Significant at 10%. **Significant at 5%. ***Significant at 1%. Standard deviations in parentheses. more in social capital formation. Furthermore, the results further made the assumption of Independence of Irrelevant suggest higher agricultural potential and better market access Alternatives (IIA) property. in Machakos. There is also higher adoption of SCI in The average marginal effects from the multinomial logit Machakos district. These results support the initial hypothe- model for adoption of SCI are presented in Table 5. The like- sis of better integrated market and tenure security in lihood ratio (LR) χ value suggests that the model fits the Machakos relative to Mbeere. We use multivariate regres- data better than an intercept only model. All the results sion analysis to test whether these differences translate into should be interpreted relative to the base category of non differences in adoption of SCI and crop productivity adoption of any conservation measure. For instance, the mar- outcomes. ginal effects imply that, on average, an increase in depen- dency ratio by 1 reduces the likelihood of adopting conservation practices, relative to nonadoption by between Econometric Results 0.03 and 0.07 points, other factors held constant. A higher To carry out the econometric analysis, the article starts by education grade is associated with a 0.025 points lower like- examining the correlation between different measures of lihood that a household will adopt terracing but 0.09 points market access and soil variables. Factor analysis is then used higher likelihood that a household will adopt grass strips, to derive the final factors for inclusion in the regression mod- relative to nonadoption of any measure. Other marginal els. For soil quality and characteristics, factor analysis is effects can be interpreted similarly. applied to responses on soil types, workability and texture of The results suggest that age of the farmer is inversely cor- the soil, and topography. The factor analysis loaded into eas- related with all forms of soil conservation and significant for ily workable (easy and fine) soils. Two market access vari- tree planting and adoption of grass strips. This is probably ables were derived from factor analysis: travel time and due to labor intensity of conservation, making them out of access to market information. reach for older farmers. Possession of a higher school grade To assess the impact of the hypothesized determinants on attainment reduces the probability of adoption of various soil conservation, a multinomial logit model for adoption of conservation practices (except ridging) by about 0.02 points. various SCI is estimated. This model is based on adoption of The results further suggest that relative to household heads terracing, tree planting (agroforestry), ridging, and grass who are farmers, being employed reduces the likelihood of strips relative to nonadoption of any conservation measure. adoption of terracing by 0.04 points but increases that of The study considered alternative estimation procedures for grass strips investments by 0.09 points analyzing the conservation decision: multinomial logit mod- In this article, tenure security is defined as an interaction els for adoption of various soil and water conservation mea- of content of tenure (strongest right on land-sell right) and sures, probit/logit models for the probability of investing in assurance (perception of low likelihood of expropriation). individual conservation measures, and ordinary least squares The results show that improved tenure security increases the (OLS) models for indices of SCI. The multinomial logit probability of adoption of grass strips relative to nonadop- regression is more appropriate than probit or logit models tion of any conservation investments by 0.063, all other fac- because the adoption decision, though nominal, consists of tors constant. The effect on adoption of other conservation more than two categories and the responses are not ordinal in practices is insignificant. Relative to plots with difficult nature as in ordered probit/logit. The OLS model results are soils, presence of easy and fine soils increases the likelihood difficult to interpret because of the nature of the dependent of adoption of terracing by 0.02 points but reduces the prob- variable. For these reasons, we retain the multinomial logit ability of adoption of tree planting by 0.035 points. There is model results. To run a multinomial logit model, choice was a 0.031 higher likelihood of adoption of ridging on plots per- made of the main type of investment on each plot to ensure ceived to have low levels of soil erosion. Longer distance to that the investments are mutually exclusive. The study plot increases the probability of adoption of terraces by 0.03 6 SAGE Open Table 5. Adoption of Various Soil Conservation Investments—Average Marginal Effects. Variables Terracing Tree planting Ridging Grass strips Household characteristics Dependency ratio −0.031*** −0.066 −0.037 −0.037*** Age of head 0.0002 −0.001*** 0.001 −0.003** Education grade attained −0.028** 0.019 −0.007 −0.024 Head is employed/business person −0.039** 0.039 −0.01 0.086* Tenure and other plot characteristics Tenure security −0.02 −0.013 −0.006 0.068*** Easy and fine soils 0.019* −0.032* 0.012 0.026 Nonerodible soils 0.012 −0.028** 0.031*** −0.011 Log distance to plot 0.032* 0.021 0.002 −0.135*** Household assets Log farm equipment 0.017 0.022* −0.015 0.044 Log value of livestock −0.018*** 0.001*** 0.004 0.006 Financial capital Log amount of remittance −0.003 0.013 0.005 −0.005 Household received extension services 0.039** 0.054** −0.040* 0.037 Social capital Proportion likely to assist in emergency −0.048 −0.064 0.012 0.291*** Proportion participating in collective action 0.019 −0.087** −0.025 0.054 Village level and market access variables Log population density 0.067*** 0.211** 0.095* 0.002* Log annual rainfall (mm) 0.038 0.191*** −0.121* 0.089* Travel time 0.001 −0.029*** −0.012 0.008 Access to market information 0.034 −0.030* 0.019 0.010 Tenure security and travel time −0.012 −0.043*** 0.006 0.046 Tenure security and access to information 0.055 −0.011 −0.042 0.0004 District (Machakos = 1) 0.117** −0.126** 0.07 0.143 Observations 793 LR χ (84) 477.98*** Log likelihood −910.98 Note. LR = likelihood ratio. *Significant at 10%. **Significant at 5%. ***Significant at 1%. but reduces the probability of adoption of grass strips by 0.14 action. These two measures of social capital are exogenous as points. the household has no control over the proportion of households Two asset variables are included to proxy the role of participating in social capital activities. The results show that household wealth on investment in soil conservation. The an increase in the proportion willing to assist in emergencies assets also reflect the type of farming practices, which influ- raises the probability of adoption by between 0.002 and 0.046 ence the type of conservation practices adopted. More farm points. A higher proportion participating in collective action equipment increases the probability of adoption of various reduces the likelihood of adoption of tree planting by 0.096 but forms of soil conservation measures by between 0.02 and raises the probably of adoption of all other practices. 0.05 points. Only the marginal effect on tree planting is sig- Village-level and market access variables are presented in nificant. Higher value of livestock lowers the probability of the last panel of Table 5. The results show that higher popula- adoption of SCI, but the impact is insignificant for ridging tion density increases the likelihood of adoption of all soil con- and grass stripping. servation measures relative to nonadoption of any practice by The analysis uncovers no significant effect of remittances between 0.002 and 0.211 points. The highest marginal impact on adoption of SCI. Access to agricultural extension ser- is on tree planting, while population density seems to matter vices, however, increases the likelihood of adoption by least for adoption of grass strips. Rainfall increases the proba- between 0.01 and 0.05 points. The marginal impact is signifi- bility of adoption of tree planting and grass strips by 0.191 and cant for adoption of terracing and grass strips. 0.089 points, respectively, relative to nonadoption of any con- Social capital is captured by the proportion of households in servation practice. Higher rainfall is however inversely corre- a village that are likely to assist one another in cases of emer- lated with the probability of adoption of ridging relative to gency and the proportion of persons participating in collective nonadoption, with an average marginal impact of 0.121. Kabubo-Mariara 7 Table 6. Joint Impact of Institutional Isolation and Development (last column of Table 6). An improvement in development Domains. domains by 1% would reduce the probability of adoption of tree planting by 0.34 % and that of adopting grass strips by Tenure security and Development 0.23%. A similar change would increase the likelihood of Model market access domains adoption of terraces and ridges by 0.01% and 0.30%, respec- Terracing 0.1600*** 0.0121*** tively. The impact on the likelihood of adoption of soil con- Tree planting 0.0630*** −0.3432*** servation in general is positive and statistically significant Ridging 0.0718* 0.3017** but quite modest. Grass strips 0.1921*** −0.2312*** Last, we include a dummy variable for Machakos district Conservation 0.0246 0.0320* to test whether location in a particular district influences adoption of SCI. The results show that farmers in Machakos *Significant at 10%. **Significant at 5%. ***Significant at 1%. district have a higher probability of adopting terraces than their counterparts in Mbeere district. However, these farmers Market access is measured by two factors: travel time and have a lower probability of planting trees than farmers in access to market information. Increased travel time, a mea- Mbeere. The results support the statistically significant dif- sure of distance/remoteness, reduces the probability of tree ference in adoption of these practices in the two districts pre- planting relative to nonadoption of any conservation invest- sented in Table 4. We uncover no significant effect of the ment by 0.051. The marginal impacts on adoption of other district dummy on probability of adoption of ridges and grass conservation investments are insignificant. Access to market strips (Table 5). information has a positive impact, which is only significant for adoption of grass strips. An increase in access to informa- Discussion tion by one more unit increases the probability of adoption of This article investigates the role of institutional isolation on grass strips by 0.028 relative to nonadoption of any conser- adoption of soil conservation in Kenya. The study is based vation measure, all other factors held constant. on the expectation that integration of market access and ten- The main hypothesis of this study was that integration of ure security is crucial for adoption of SCI. The results point tenure security and market access is important for adoption at several key factors that affect soil conservation decisions: of SCI. Though individual impacts of some of the indicators tenure security, market access, and development domains. of these two factors suggest that both tenure security and The results show that tenure security exhibits positive market access are important and significant determinants of impacts on adoption of all SCI, relative to all other forms of conservation, we test for their joint impact by including conservation. This supports literature that has found tenure interaction terms of tenure security and travel time, and also security to provide incentives for soil conservation (Kabubo- tenure security and access to market information. The results Mariara, 2007). Except for tree planting, there is a higher suggest that an interaction of tenure security and travel time likelihood of adoption of SCI on plots with easy and fine to facility (remoteness) is inversely correlated with adoption soils, compared with plots with difficult soils. There is also a of terraces and tree planting but positive for ridging and significantly higher likelihood of adoption of ridging on grass strips. Only the impacts for tree planting and grass plots that are perceived to have low levels of soil erosion strips are significant. The results of interaction seem to be while tree planting is less likely to occur on nonerodible driven by the relative strengths of the impacts of individual soils. The mixed results find support in Pender et al. (2006a), factors. For terraces and tree planting, the negative impact of who argued of expected ambiguous impacts of agricultural travel time outweighs the positive impact of tenure security, potential on land degradation. Kabubo-Mariara et al. (2010) while the reverse is observed for ridging and grass strips. also found mixed impacts of soil quality on adoption of soil We further re-examine the key hypothesis of the study by conservation. The negative significant marginal effect of dis- evaluating the significance of the joint marginal impacts of tance to plot on adoption of grass strips suggests that tenure security, market access variables, and their interaction increased production costs (time wise) will hinder adoption terms (institutional isolation). The results (Table 6) show that of sustainable land management practices (Gebremedhin & institutional isolation has a positive significant effect of Swinton, 2003; Kabubo-Mariara et al., 2010; Kruseman et adoption of all land conservation investments. The impact is al., 2006). relatively higher for adoption of terraces and grass stripping. On market access, the inverse relationship between travel The joint marginal impact of integration on terracing is 0.16. time and adoption of conservation investments on one hand, This suggests that a reduction in the extent of institutional and the positive impact of access to market information on isolation by 1% would boost adoption of soil conservation by adoption of grass strips on the other, suggests that institu- about 16%, ceteris paribus. Other results can be interpreted tional isolation will hinder adoption of SCI through higher in a similar manner. transaction costs. The results suggest that an interaction of We test for the impact of development domains by carry- tenure security and travel time to facility (remoteness) ing out statistical tests for the three groups of variables: agri- encourages adoption of grass strips but discourages tree cultural potential, market access, and population pressure 8 SAGE Open planting. Evaluation of the joint significance of tenure secu- adoption of SCI, three alternative approaches are utilized. rity and market access suggests that integration of tenure First we evaluate the impacts of tenure security and market security and good market access incentivize adoption of soil access. Second, we evaluate the impact of interaction terms conservation but favor more permanent investments (adop- of tenure and market access variables. Third, we evaluate the tion of terraces and grass strips) in soil conservation. This significance of the joint impact of the two groups of vari- supports the key hypothesis of this study. The joint impact of ables and their interaction terms. development domain dimensions is most pronounced on The results show that tenure security positively influences adoption of tree planting and ridging. Favorable develop- the decision to adopt and also the forms of SCI adopted. ment domains boost adoption of terraces and ridges but dis- Results for market access factors and distance to plot suggest courage tree planting and adoption of grass strips. This that remoteness is inversely correlated with adoption of SCI, implies that the impact of development domains depends on supporting our hypothesis on the role of institutional isola- the type of conservation practice. The impact on the likeli- tion in adoption of SCI. Integration of tenure security and hood of adoption of conservation investments, in general, market access boosts adoption of all conservation invest- supports the hypothesis that favorable development domains ments but has a larger impact on adoption of terraces and boosts adoption of SCI. grass stripping. Population density exhibits positive signifi- Population density exhibits positive significant impacts cant impacts on adoption of all SCI, supporting the on adoption of all SCI. This supports Boserup’s hypothesis Boserupian hypothesis of increased agricultural intensifica- of increased agricultural intensification as population density tion as population density increases. The impact of develop- increases (Boserup, 1965; Kabubo-Mariara, 2007; Pender et ment domains depends on the type on conservation practice, al., 2006a). The positive impact of rainfall concurs with the favoring adoption of terraces and ridging but inversely hypothesis that higher rainfall areas are associated with affecting tree planting and grass strips. greater adoption of vegetative land management practices The findings of this study suggest that institutional isola- such as use of agroforestry, live barriers, and mulching tion is important for adoption of soil conservation technolo- because of higher biomass productivity in such areas (Pender gies. It is therefore important to open up remote areas to et al., 2006a). The Machakos district dummy suggests that facilitate adoption of alternative SCI. Enhancing security of farmers in Machakos are generally more likely to adopt soil tenure is also crucial for promoting long-term investments in conservation practices than their counterparts in Mbeere dis- soil conservation. The impact of development domains is trict. The only exception is for tree planting where we find a found to be context specific. This requires dissemination of negative significant average marginal effect. This result sup- information to farmers on appropriate land conservation ports Tiffen et al. (1994) and our earlier hypothesis that technologies and farming systems appropriate in different Machakos district may be associated with higher adoption of domains. Research into the relative differentials in the soil conservation measures as it is less isolated institutionally responsiveness of adoption of soil conservation to the com- relative to Mbeere district (Kabubo-Mariara, 2012, 2014). ponents of development domains in different regions of the The richer the social capital, the higher the likelihood of country should form an important source of information for adoption of SCI. This supports development policy view that dissemination to farmers. Experiences of what works/does social capital is a productive asset that can be strategically not work in other regions should also be an integral part of mobilized by individuals for particular ends (Nyangena & this research and dissemination strategy. Sterner, 2009). Literature suggests that collective action for This study makes an important contribution to the litera- natural resource management can mitigate the negative influ- ture on institutional economics. However, given data limita- ence of population pressure on natural resource management tions, there are some important issues that could not be drawn as predicted by the Malthusian perspective (Kabubo-Mariara, into this study. First, further research is needed to investigate 2012, 2014; Pender et al., 2006b). the impact of institutional isolation on adoption of water con- servation technologies in Kenya. Second, there is need for research that incorporates technological spillovers when Conclusion assessing the impact of institutional isolation on adoption of The study investigates whether soil conservation responds to SCI. Third, studies on adoption of SCI do not take into institutional isolation. It draws from the sustainable land account land prices, yet it is probable that farmers practice management framework and the literature on tenure security soil conservation because their land is valuable and they incentives. The study is based on 793 plots from a sample of want to maintain such land values. Future studies should try 528 households drawn from Mbeere and Machakos districts to incorporate land prices. Fourth, there is need to try to esti- of Eastern Province of Kenya. A community survey is used mate the overall financial and time efforts by farmers to augment the household survey. for SCI. Descriptive and econometric methods are used to test the Author’s Note study hypothesis. Multinomial logit models are estimated for adoption of various SCI. To test the hypothesis that integra- Comments from CEEPA resources persons are acknowledged. I am tion of tenure security and market access is important for however responsible for any errors and omissions. Kabubo-Mariara 9 Declaration of Conflicting Interests Kabubo-Mariara, J. (2012). Institutional isolation, soil conservation and crop productivity: Evidence from Machakos and Mbeere The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect districts in Kenya. African Journal of Social Sciences, 2(3), to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. 1-26. Kabubo-Mariara, J. (2014). Integrating market access and tenure Funding security: The role of institutional isolation in crop productiv- The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support ity in Kenya. International Journal of Economic Perspectives, for the research and/or authorship of this article: This research was 8(1), 85-111. funded by the Centre of Environmental Economics and Policy in Kabubo-Mariara, J., Linderhof, V., & Kruseman, G. (2010). Does Africa (CEEPA). land tenure security matter for investment in soil and water conservation? Evidence from Kenya. African Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 4, 123-139. Notes Kruseman, G., Ruben, R., & Tesfay, G. (2006). Village stratifica- 1. Institutional isolation refers to lack of coherence or harmony tion for policy analysis: Multiple development domains in the in the structured set of ordered relations that define individual Ethiopian highlands of Tigray. In J. Pender, S. Ehui, & F. Place expectation and behavior. A coherent institutional regime is (Eds.), Strategies for sustainable land management in the East one that serves to secure expectations so that forward look- African highlands, pp 81-106. Washington, DC: International ing behavior is facilitated (Bromley, 2008). In this article, we Food Policy Research Institute. define institutional isolation as lack of coherence between Ndah, H. T., Schuler, J., Uthes, S., Zander, P., Triomphe, B., market access and tenure security. Mkomwa, S., & Corbeels, M. (2015). Adoption poten- 2. Adoption of soil conservation investments (SCI) is a form of tial for conservation agriculture in Africa: A newly devel- land management system, and long-term SCI measures can be oped assessment approach (QAToCA) applied in Kenya and seen as sustainable land management practices. Tanzania. Land Degradation & Development., 26,2,133-141. 3. Initial regressions included membership in village groups, doi:10.1002/ldr.2191 trust, and also an aggregate social capital index. The results Nyangena, W. N., & Sterner, T. (2009). Social and rural institu- suggested that both measures are positively correlated with tions in Kenya. Is Machakos unique? Chinese Business Review, conservation. These variables are, however, potentially endog- 8(10), 1-18. enous. Attempts at instrumentation of these variables became Pender, J., Place, F., & Ehui, S. (1999). Strategies for Sustainable problematic, and no meaningful results were obtained. For this Agricultural Development in the East African Highlands. reason, they were dropped from the soil conservation model. Environment and Production Technology Division Discussion Paper No. 41. International Food Policy Research References Institute.Washington, D.C. Arnot, C., Luckert, M. K., & Boxall, P. C. (2011). What is tenure Pender, J., Ehui, S., & Place, F. (2006a). Conceptual framework and security? Conceptual implications for empirical analysis. Land hypotheses. In J. Pender, S. Ehui, & F. Place (Eds.), Strategies Economics, 87, 297-311. for sustainable land management in the East African high- Barrett, C. B., & Swallow, B. M. (2007). Fractal poverty traps. lands, pp 31-58. Washington, DC: International Food Policy World Development, 34, 1-15. Research Institute. Benin, S. (2006). Policies and Programs Affecting Land Pender, J., Ehui, S., & Place, F. (2006b). Strategies for sustainable Management Practices, Input Use, and Productivity in the land management in the East African highlands. Washington, Highlands of Amhara Region, Ethiopia. In Pender J., S. Ehui & DC: International Food Policy Research Institute. F. Place (Eds.), Strategies for Sustainable Land Management in Pender, J., Nkonya, E., Jagger, P., Sserunkuuma, D., & Ssali, H. the East African Highlands. International Food Policy Research (2004). Strategies to increase agricultural productivity and Institute. Washington D.C. reduce land degradation: Evidence from Uganda. Agricultural Besley, T. (1995). Property rights and investment incentives: Theory and Economics, 31, 181-195. evidence from Ghana. Journal of Political Economy, 103, 903-937. Tesfaye, A., Negatu, W., Brouwer, R., & van der Zaag, P. (2013). Bizoza, A. R. (2013). Three-stage analysis of the adoption of soil Understanding soil conservation decision of farmers in the and water conservation in the highlands of Rwanda. Land Gedeb watershed, Ethiopia. Land Degradation & Development, Degradation & Development, 25, 360-372. doi:10.1002/ldr.2145 25, 71-79. doi:10.1002/ldr.2187 Boserup, E. (1965). The conditions of agricultural growth: The eco- Tiffen, M., Mortimore, M., & Gichuki, F. (1994). More people, less nomics of agrarian change under population pressure. New erosion: Environmental recovery in Kenya. Chichester, UK: York, NY: Aldine Press. John Wiley. Bromley, D. (2008). Resource degradation in the African com- mons: Accounting for institutional decay. Environment and Author Biography Development Economics, 13, 539-563. Gebremedhin, B., & Swinton, S. M. (2003). Investment in soil con- Jane Kabubo-Mariara is a Professor of Economics and current servation in Northern Ethiopia: The role of land tenure security Director of the School of Economics, University of Nairobi, Kenya. and public programs. Agricultural Economics, 29, 69-84. Her key research interests include the impact (and adaptations) of Kabubo-Mariara, J. (2007). Land conservation and tenure secu- climate change on agriculture; environmental and natural resource rity in Kenya: Boserup’s hypothesis revisited. Ecological economics; and poverty and income distribution issues, with Economics, 64, 25-35. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.06.007 emphasis on multiple dimensions of child poverty.

Journal

SAGE OpenSAGE

Published: Feb 11, 2015

Keywords: market access; tenure security; institutional isolation; soil conservation; development domains; Kenya

There are no references for this article.