Gender-associated differences in risk attitudes and perceptions among farmers in Mali

Similar documents
RESEARCH UPDATE from Texas Wine Marketing Research Institute by Natalia Kolyesnikova, PhD Tim Dodd, PhD THANK YOU SPONSORS

ARE THERE SKILLS PAYOFFS IN LOW AND MIDDLE-INCOME COUNTRIES?

Religion and Innovation

Power and Priorities: Gender, Caste, and Household Bargaining in India

A Web Survey Analysis of the Subjective Well-being of Spanish Workers

AJAE Appendix: Testing Household-Specific Explanations for the Inverse Productivity Relationship

A Comparison of X, Y, and Boomer Generation Wine Consumers in California

ASSESSING THE HEALTHFULNESS OF FOOD PURCHASES AMONG LOW-INCOME AREA SHOPPERS IN THE NORTHEAST

International Journal of Business and Commerce Vol. 3, No.8: Apr 2014[01-10] (ISSN: )

Debt and Debt Management among Older Adults

Wine Purchase Intentions: A Push-Pull Study of External Drivers, Internal Drivers, and Personal Involvement

Problem. Background & Significance 6/29/ _3_88B 1 CHD KNOWLEDGE & RISK FACTORS AMONG FILIPINO-AMERICANS CONNECTED TO PRIMARY CARE SERVICES

Table A.1: Use of funds by frequency of ROSCA meetings in 9 research sites (Note multiple answers are allowed per respondent)

Measuring economic value of whale conservation

An application of cumulative prospect theory to travel time variability

Leverage the Rising Sustainability Wave

Gender equality in the coffee sector. Dr Christoph Sänger 122 nd Session of the International Coffee Council 17 September 2018

Emerging Local Food Systems in the Caribbean and Southern USA July 6, 2014

Awareness, Attitude & Usage Study Executive Summary

Structures of Life. Investigation 1: Origin of Seeds. Big Question: 3 rd Science Notebook. Name:

Multiple Imputation for Missing Data in KLoSA

Supply & Demand for Lake County Wine Grapes. Christian Miller Lake County MOMENTUM April 13, 2015

Previous analysis of Syrah

Dietary Diversity in Urban and Rural China: An Endogenous Variety Approach

The Role of Calorie Content, Menu Items, and Health Beliefs on the School Lunch Perceived Health Rating

Danish Consumer Preferences for Wine and the Impact of Involvement

US Chicken Consumption. Presentation to Chicken Marketing Summit July 18, 2017 Asheville, NC

Consumer Preferences Trends

RESULTS OF THE MARKETING SURVEY ON DRINKING BEER

This is a repository copy of Poverty and Participation in Twenty-First Century Multicultural Britain.

FAST FOOD PROJECT WAVE 1 CAMPAIGN: PREPARED FOR: "La Plazza" PREPARED BY: "Your Company Name" CREATED ON: 26 May 2014

Update : Consumer Attitudes

COMPARISON OF THREE METHODOLOGIES TO IDENTIFY DRIVERS OF LIKING OF MILK DESSERTS

It s about time! Gender, parenthood and household divisions of labor under different welfare regimes

Twisting Tradition: Alternative Wine Closures (a U.S. Study)

segregation and educational opportunity

1) What proportion of the districts has written policies regarding vending or a la carte foods?

STUDY REGARDING THE RATIONALE OF COFFEE CONSUMPTION ACCORDING TO GENDER AND AGE GROUPS

Texas Wine Marketing Research Institute College of Human Sciences Texas Tech University CONSUMER ATTITUDES TO TEXAS WINES

The age of reproduction The effect of university tuition fees on enrolment in Quebec and Ontario,

Characteristics of Wine Consumers in the Mid-Atlantic States: A Statistical Analysis

Pitfalls for the Construction of a Welfare Indicator: An Experimental Analysis of the Better Life Index

Missing value imputation in SAS: an intro to Proc MI and MIANALYZE

Comparative Analysis of Fresh and Dried Fish Consumption in Ondo State, Nigeria

Sustainable Coffee Challenge FAQ

Gender and Firm-size: Evidence from Africa

Wine-Tasting by Numbers: Using Binary Logistic Regression to Reveal the Preferences of Experts

Aging, Social Capital, and Health Care Utilization in the Province of Ontario, Canada

Gail E. Potter, Timo Smieszek, and Kerstin Sailer. April 24, 2015

Investigating China s Stalled Revolution : Husband and Wife Involvement in Housework in the PRC. Juhua Yang Susan E. Short

Financing Decisions of REITs and the Switching Effect

Wine Australia Wine.com Data Report. July 21, 2017

A CASE STUDY: HOW CONSUMER INSIGHTS DROVE THE SUCCESSFUL LAUNCH OF A NEW RED WINE

Volume 30, Issue 1. Gender and firm-size: Evidence from Africa

Occupational Structure and Social Stratification in East Asia: A Comparative Study of Japan, Korea and Taiwan

PARENTAL SCHOOL CHOICE AND ECONOMIC GROWTH IN NORTH CAROLINA

Access to Affordable and Nutritious Food: Measuring and Understanding Food Deserts and Their Consequences

Food in South Asia and China. Food is playing a significant role in people s lives. In China, there is a

Population Trends 139 Spring 2010

Is Fair Trade Fair? ARKANSAS C3 TEACHERS HUB. 9-12th Grade Economics Inquiry. Supporting Questions

MBA 503 Final Project Guidelines and Rubric

Bt Corn IRM Compliance in Canada

Canada Portraits. P re p a re d b y W i n e I n t e l l i ge n c e. Wine Intelligence 2018

Survey for the International Riesling Foundation

Consumers and Fruit Quality

Starbucks BRAZIL. Presentation Outline

A Structural Equation Modelling Approach to Explore Consumers' Attitude Towards Sustainable Wine

To make wine, to sell the grapes or to deliver them to a cooperative: determinants of the allocation of the grapes

Fairtrade Buying Behaviour: We Know What They Think, But Do We Know What They Do?

HONDURAS. A Quick Scan on Improving the Economic Viability of Coffee Farming A QUICK SCAN ON IMPROVING THE ECONOMIC VIABILITY OF COFFEE FARMING

GENDER PARTICIPATION IN THE PRODUCTION AND MARKETING OF SEAWEED IN DAVAO DEL SUR, PHILIPPINES

Factors Influencing Pulse Consumption in Canada

CGSS Journal of Arid Land Resources and Environment Jan Aizen C916

The National Pork Board Pork Champion Quantitative Study Spring RAC 2014

A Study of Consumers Perception of Risk on Organic Tea in Taiwan

APPENDIX 1 THE SURVEY INSTRUMENT - QUESTIONNAIRE

Wine Futures: Pricing and Allocation as Levers against Quality Uncertainty

Bag In Box Consumer Preferences in the UK. Presented during the Performance BIB meetings in Bristol, England 24 & 25 October 2012

NO TO ARTIFICIAL, YES TO FLAVOR: A LOOK AT CLEAN BALANCERS

What do consumers think about farm animal welfare in modern agriculture? Attitudes and shopping behaviour

Household Demand for Sorghum and Pearl millet in Mali and Niger: An Application of the Linear Approximate Almost Ideal Demand Systems (LA-AIDS)

Online Appendix for. To Buy or Not to Buy: Consumer Constraints in the Housing Market

Looking Long: Demographic Change, Economic Crisis, and the Prospects for Reducing Poverty. La Conyuntura vs. the Long-run

(A report prepared for Milk SA)

Chicken Usage Summary

Background & Literature Review The Research Main Results Conclusions & Managerial Implications

Availability of Nutritional Information in a National Sample of Fast Food Restaurants

GLOBAL TILT AND LUMBAR LORDOSIS INDEX Two parameters to understand posi0ve balance analysis

ETHIOPIA. A Quick Scan on Improving the Economic Viability of Coffee Farming A QUICK SCAN ON IMPROVING THE ECONOMIC VIABILITY OF COFFEE FARMING

Availability of Healthy Food in Corner Stores in Hartford, CT

Consumer Responses to Food Products Produced Near the Fukushima Nuclear Plant

KALLAS, Z.; ESCOBAR, C. & GIL, J.M.

Consumer study on fruit - In depth interviews -

CENTER TRT EVALUATION PLAN. Kaiser Permanente Worksite Cafeteria Menu Labeling. Evaluation Plan:

Which of these two causes do you think seems like the most convincing? Defend Thyself!

The determinantsof charitable givingin Belgium

Labor Supply of Married Couples in the Formal and Informal Sectors in Thailand

Transportation demand management in a deprived territory: A case study in the North of France

Engaging with volunteers: risk accompanying benefits. October 25, 2017

In the eye of the beer holder: thoughts on color, bubbles and the meaning of life. Charlie Bamforth

Transcription:

Gender-associated differences in risk attitudes and perceptions among farmers in Mali Alison Cullen, C. Leigh Anderson, Pierre Biscaye, Audrey Lawrence

Presentation overview > Research question > Risk attitudes & gender why it matters > Theory & risk perception in the literature > Farmer First data Risk-related survey questions > Methods > Demographics & empirical results > Findings > Conclusions

Research questions > Do risk perceptions differ systematically between male and female farmers in Mali across risk domains? > What factors other than gender are associated with differences in risk perceptions?

Why might gender differences in risk perceptions matter? > Adoption rates of development interventions often fall short of expectations (Feder and Umali, 1993) and vary by gender (Doss and Morris, 2001) > An individual s perception of risk often affects the likelihood of new technology adoption (Mara, Pannell and Ghadim, 2002) Therefore, the potential exists for gender-specific interventions to improve adoption rates

Theory and Literature: Risk Preferences & Gender > Gender differences may be due to differences in activities and roles, unequal power, differing levels of trust (Flynn et al.,1995) > Gustafson (1998) characterizes gender by segregation & hierarchy, difference in perception less important than how genders attach meaning to risk > Women more averse re: financial risk (Charness and Gneezy, 2012; Gneezy et al., 2003; Gupta et al., 2005; Croson and Gneezy, 2009) > Women less likely to compete (Fletschner et al., 2010; Anderson et al., 2014; Booth, 2012) > Feelings or emotions associated with risk, importance of perceived benefit/cost (Lowenstein, 2001; Slovic, Fischoff and Lichtenstein, 1979)

Risk Perception: Other Predictors > Wealth, Income stability, Occupation, Age, Health, Education, Personality Traits (Nicholson et al., 2005; Dohmen et al., 2011) > Qualitative Characteristics of Risk, e.g., Familiarity, Voluntariness (Slovic, Fischoff, and Lichtenstein, 1979) > Networked-ness and Access to information (Weber and Hsee,1998) > Worldview hierarchical, egalitarian, fatalistic, and individualism Wildavsky and Dake, 1990) > Distinct research gaps exist on particular cultural groups, ethnicity matters for risk perception (Marris, Langford, and O Riordan, 1998) Must control for multiple factors when exploring role of gender.

Theory and Literature: Risk Domains & Gender > Men more risk taking except with respect to social domain (Weber, Blais and Betz, 2002) > Swedish women more often oriented toward home/family domain, men toward work domain (Jakobsen and Karlsson, 1996) > Women are more often caregivers thus worry about health/safety domain (Davidson and Freudenburg, 1996) > Women more frequently express concern about environment domain, men about health/safety (Fischer et al., 1991)

Farmer First Data > Smallholder farmers in Mali surveyed in October 2010 by TNS Research International, BMGF Funded > Household head answered all questions in the survey, spouses answered a subset of personal information, attitude and opinion questions

Mali Collection Regions > We focus on Malian households with singleheaded or dual-headed opposite sex households 2,703 total observations 1,414 households > 6 Malian regions surveyed: Gao, Kayes, Koulikoro, Mopti, Segou, and Sikasso

Sample demographics Household Total (SD) Children under 15 2.43 (2.18) Number of large livestock 2.63 (1.96) Number of fowl & beehives 0.62 (0.76) Number of crops grown 3.52 (2.23) Individual Men Women Age (years) 51.26 (13.87) 39.32 (12.40) Health (1 lowest, 5 highest) 3.90 3.92 Income secure (1=secure) 0.70 0.65 Time poverty (1=more time 0.29 0.26 poor relative to income poor) Observations 1,390 1,313

Perceived Risk Across Domains Risk Perception Prompt: How frequently have you worried about the following risks in the past 12 months? (1) Not at all; (2) Sometimes; (3) All the time? Six Risk Domains Financial Health Security Livelihood Environment Social Potential Sources of Risk/Concern Increasing Level of Debt Work Injury War/Conflict Lack of Buyers at the Market More Extreme Weather Weaker Community Relationships

Risk Responses by Gender How frequently have you worried about the following risks in the past 12 months? (1) Not at all; (2) Sometimes; (3) All the time.

Methods > Factor Analysis - Principal Component Analysis - Distilled modes of worry about risk across six domains > Regression Analysis - Assessed the association between gender and categorical level of worry across risk domains - Compared to binary OLS & logit results (combined categories of some worry and worry all the time)

Factor Analysis (PCA) PC 2 (15% of variance explained) 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0-0.2-0.4-0.6-0.8-1 Extreme Weather Community Relation Work Injury Lack Buyers Debt Conflict -1-0.8-0.6-0.4-0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 PC 1 (47% of variance explained)

Factor Analysis (PCA) Results > PC1 domains tightly cluster, worriers v. non-worriers > 47% variance explained > PC2 much more variable, accounts for domain similarities/differences > 15% of variance explained > Community Relationships, Injury at Work cluster in PC2, suggests a similar response to emotional and physical risks > Lack of Buyers, Debt, i.e., risks related to economic health and the market, cluster in PC2, elicit a fairly similar response > Most distinct domains: Extreme Weather, Conflict These sources of risk are largely out of the hands of individuals and elicit different risk perceptions and responses than domains which are more tied to individual choice and behavior.

Individual Categorical OLS regression results How often do you worry about X? Work injury Extreme weather Community relations Debt Lack of Buyers Sex (1=female) 0.067 * -0.065 * 0.070 * 0.069 * 0.160 *** 0.087 * Conflict Age (years) 0.001-0.001-0.002 * 0.000 0.002 0.005 *** Children under 15-0.023 ** -0.017 * -0.024 ** 0.011-0.006 0.008 Income secure (1=adequate income) -0.209 *** -0.148 *** 0.002 0.082 * 0.139 *** -0.062* Time poverty (1=time poor) 0.141 *** 0.154 *** 0.006-0.190 *** 0.029-0.014 Education level (1=at least one year of school, 0=none) 0.063 * 0.009 0.082 * 0.071 * 0.094 * 0.051 Self-health assessment (1-5; v. poor v. good) 0.056 ** 0.024 0.034-0.004 0.081 *** 0.060 ** ^Social Extroversion: Like to tell others about new farm methods 0.034 * 0.005 0.050 ** 0.047 * 0.056 ** 0.113 *** ^Fatalistic: Can t avoid misfortune 0.070 *** 0.030 * 0.091 *** 0.039 ** 0.017 0.133 *** ^Individualistic: Doesn t want farm advice 0.041 ** 0.058 *** 0.110 *** 0.090 *** 0.104 *** 0.068 *** Optimism (1=optimistic) -0.125 ** -0.120 * -0.160 *** -0.133 ** -0.234 *** -0.066 Risk Preference (1=seeking) -0.283 *** -0.216 *** -0.204 *** -0.126 * -0.201 *** -0.360 *** Self-efficacy (1-3; not confident confident) 0.094 *** 0.055 * 0.065 ** 0.038 0.054 * 0.033 ^Social Orientation: discusses farm issues w/ others 0.084 *** -0.054 ** 0.066 *** 0.050 ** 0.113 *** 0.118 *** Network: # different info sources 0.145 *** 0.098 *** 0.227 *** 0.233 *** 0.216 *** 0.167 *** # large livestock -0.025 ** -0.015* -0.019 * -0.014-0.014 0.001 # fowl & beehives -0.086 *** -0.074 *** -0.097 *** -0.030-0.050 * -0.019 # diff crops sold/consumed -0.009-0.043 *** -0.013* 0.011-0.011 0.042 *** Adjusted R2 0.125 0.084 0.147 0.102 0.124 0.166 Observations 2385 2372 2417 2395 2388 2404 ^1=disagrees completely 2=somewhat disagrees 3=neither agree nor disagree 4=somewhat agrees 5=agrees completely

Findings Categorical OLS Regression > Female: express more worry, except with respect to Extreme Weather Significant at p<0.1 for all Six Domains > Biggest effects for Networked/Informed, Optimist, Risk-Seeker > Fatalistic, Individualistic, Networked: higher worry all domains > Optimists and Risk-Seekers: lower worry > Socially Oriented: worry more overall, except for Extreme Weather > Income Secure (mixed picture), Time Poor (generally worry more) > Parents with Children Under 15 worry less for Work Injury, Extreme Weather, Community Relationships > Conflict and Extreme Weather exhibit distinct patterns and associations Wealthier, Older, Diverse Crop Portfolio, Risk Seekers: more worry re: Conflict Men, Childless, Time and Income Poor, Risk Averse: more worry re: Extreme Weather Note: Results from alternative model specifications (Binary OLS and Logit) were similar with an even stronger gender signal

Conclusions > Significant gender differences in risk perception, all domains > Women select response Worry Sometimes more often > Men select response Worry all the Time more often > Women express higher levels of worry except with respect to Extreme Weather, when controlling for demographics, worldview, etc. > Biggest effects Networked/Informed, Optimists, Risk-Seekers > Level of perceived individual control over risk domain matters Understanding that men s and women s risk perceptions differ lends insight into intrahousehold decision making, program uptake rates, and supports the design of effective interventions with improved levels of adoption for new technologies and programs.

Acknowledgements Thank you EPAR Evans Policy Analysis and Research Group Professor C. Leigh Anderson, EPAR PI Professor Travis Reynolds, EPAR co-pi Pierre Biscaye, EPAR Support from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation Thank you Research Assistants Melissa Greenaway, David Coomes

Thank you! Questions?

Principal Components Analysis Risk Domain Principal Components 1 2 3 4 Conflict.642 -.493 -.265.506 Worsening Debt Situation.651 -.264.623 -.021 Community Relationships.748.160.005.028 More Extreme Weather.537.739.125.296 Injuries at Work.701.091 -.536 -.269 Lack of Buyers for Farm Produce.788 -.117.088 -.385

Risk-related Questions How frequently have you worried about the following risks in the past 12 months? (1) Not at all; (2) Sometimes; (3) All the time: Conflict Lack of buyers for farm produce Worsening debt situation Community relationships More extreme weather Injuries at work 1.5 1.55 1.6 1.65 1.7 1.75 1.8 1.85 1.9 1.95 2 2.05 Female Average Male Average