Project topics and materials
Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »
RESEARCH PROBLEM AND JUSTIFICATION
Despite the importance accorded to the AIS research paradigm in transforming rural livelihoods from a subsistence orientation to an agri-business perspective, the paradigm is not a panacea for the problems plaguing the agricultural sector in Africa. This is mainly because some of its main features2 have been part of the debates in the agricultural research arena for the last 20 years (Hall, 2007) but have been reworked to suit the contemporary social, economic and political conditions as well as advancements in analytical tools and research capacities. Although adaptation of the agricultural research process to suit prevailing contexts is not erroneous, the danger is that the prevailing agricultural research paradigm may lose focus of its core aims with the centre being on what Hall (2007a) terms « debates … by agricultural scientists … about how agricultural knowledge should be used for development … with the aim of directing policy towards one specific approach at the expense of others ».
This may in fact be the reason that there are currently very few empirical studies that analyse the impacts of AIS in an African context on rural people’s ability to better utilise available natural resources – thereby enhancing their production, increasing their food security or diversifying their livelihoods. Hence, in order to steer agricultural research policy debate towards actual discussion of the effects on end users’ livelihoods of the use of AIS in the research process, it is essential that empirical evidence be generated. This will ensure that the focus is not solely on the organisation of the agricultural research process but rather mainly on the impacts of the paradigm shift.
Given these concerns and the increasing prevalence of the innovation systems concept in agricultural research rhetoric, policy and practice in Africa, and in Malawi in particular, it is essential that robust quantitative studies be conducted that analyse empirically the impact of the use of innovation systems concepts in agricultural research on the livelihood outcomes of rural households. Studies, such as those conducted by Kaarai et al. (2008; 2009) are mainly case study analysis of the impacts of the use of AIS concepts in the research process. These studies lack the analytical rigour of methods employed in the study of AIS as employed in the developed world (Spielman, et al. 2009). It is for this reason that the World Bank (2007b) has called for « empirical validation » of the use of AIS concepts in research in Africa.
Furthermore, since AIS research and development goes beyond technology development to the fostering of market participation of rural end users, any contemporary relevant studies must go beyond micro-economic level analysis to examine the impacts of macro-economic policy shocks that transmit through the market economy on rural livelihoods. Studies that go beyond the micro-economic level to assess the impacts of macro-economic policy shocks can be found in literature (Robilliard et al., 2001; Bourguignon et al., 2008; Ravallion & Loksin, 2008; Bussolo et al., 2008). However the majority of such studies provide an assessment of the aggregate impacts of macro-economic policy shocks such as impacts on aggregate reduction in poverty. They do not provide insight into specific household level effects.
Secondly, the few studies which can be found in literature which assess household level effects in Malawi such as studies by Dorward (2003; 2006) and Dorward et al. (2004) have used modelling techniques in which the household model is integrated with a rural economy model to simulate the effects of different policy shocks; but in which the macro-economy is exogenous to the rural economy model. Although the modelling techniques are robust, they do not reflect reality of the linkages between the rural households, the rural economy and the macro-economy in Malawi. As such there has been a call for the development of simple, unambiguous techniques that are capable of providing an analysis of household level effects of macro-economic policy changes which take into account existing relationships and linkages between the different levels of the economy in Malawi (Dorward et al., 2004).
This study will therefore contribute towards not only understanding the paradigm shift in AIS research and development but it will also lead to the generation of credible evidence which can be used as a basis for the formulation of effective agricultural research policies and programmes that are aligned with macro-economic policies.
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND
1.2 RESEARCH PROBLEM AND JUSTIFICATION .
1.3 HYPOTHESES AND OBJECTIVES.
1.4 STUDY OUTLINE.
CHAPTER 2 RURAL LIVELIHOODS AND AGRICULTURAL INNOVATION SYSTEMS
2.1 INTRODUCTION
2.2 UNDERSTANDING RURAL LIVELIHOODS
2.3 THE CONCEPT OF AGRICULTURAL INNOVATION SYSTEMS
2.4 CHAPTER SUMMARY..
CHAPTER 3 ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK.
3.1 INTRODUCTION.
3.2 THE MICRO-COMPONENT .
3.3 THE MACRO-COMPONENT.
3.4 MACRO-MICRO LINKAGES AND MODEL CONSISTENCY.
3.5 CHAPTER SUMMARY
CHAPTER 4 QUANTIFYING THE IMPACT OF AGRICULTURAL INNOVATION SYSTEMS ON RURAL LIVELIHOODS .
4.1 INTRODUCTION.
4.2 METHODOLOGY.
4.3 DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS OF SAMPLED HOUSEHOLDS
4.4 IMPACT OF AIS DRIVEN RESEARCH
4.5 HOUSEHOLD TYPOLOGIES AND INCOME PORTFOLIOS
4.6 CHAPTER SUMMARY.
CHAPTER 5. DYNAMICS OF THE MALAWI MAIZE MARKET
5.1 INTRODUCTION
5.2 DESCRIPTION OF THE DATA.
5.3 PRICE FORMATION IN THE MALAWI MAIZE MARKET
5.4 MODEL SPECIFICATION, ESTIMATION AND VALIDATION
5.5 CHAPTER SUMMARY
CHAPTER 6 SIMULATION ANALYSIS
6.1 INTRODUCTION..
6.2 BASELINE PROJECTIONS
6.3 MODEL DYNAMIC RESPONSES.
6.4 IMPACT OF POLICY SHOCKS ON HOUSEHOLD INCOME
6.5 CHALLENGES FACED AND LIMITATIONS .
6.6 CHAPTER SUMMARY
CHAPTER 7 SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
7.1 SUMMARY
7.2 CONCLUSIONS .
7.3 POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
REFERENCES .
