28.01.2015 Views

The Future of Smallholder Farming in Eastern Africa - Uganda ...

The Future of Smallholder Farming in Eastern Africa - Uganda ...

The Future of Smallholder Farming in Eastern Africa - Uganda ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

jo<strong>in</strong>t significance test on the 4 dropped variables yielded F-Statistic <strong>of</strong> 0.296, which is<br />

<strong>in</strong>significant at 10% level mean<strong>in</strong>g that the four variables are not jo<strong>in</strong>tly significant and as<br />

such, we lost noth<strong>in</strong>g by dropp<strong>in</strong>g them.<br />

It is notable that the dummy variables for Laikipia (D1-D4) and those for Suba (D5-D7)<br />

differ substantially. It was observed that the regional dummies for Laikipia were positive<br />

while those for Suba were negative. This <strong>in</strong> essence <strong>in</strong>dicates the wide variation <strong>of</strong> maize<br />

yields between the two districts with those for Suba be<strong>in</strong>g substantially lower, and hence<br />

the negative dummy. In the next sections, we are go<strong>in</strong>g to exam<strong>in</strong>e some <strong>of</strong> the<br />

relationships that were derived from this model.<br />

Figure 14 shows the relative strengths <strong>of</strong> the relationships between agricultural<br />

productivity and some <strong>of</strong> its determ<strong>in</strong>ants that were considered <strong>in</strong> this study. It shows that<br />

productivity was more strongly related to education level <strong>of</strong> the land user and the slope <strong>of</strong><br />

land than all the other determ<strong>in</strong>ants. Both were significant at 5 percent level. <strong>The</strong> detailed<br />

outcome <strong>of</strong> the regression is as <strong>in</strong> Table 8.<br />

Figure 14: Key factors <strong>in</strong>fluenc<strong>in</strong>g agricultural productivity<br />

Tenure Security<br />

Slope <strong>of</strong> Land<br />

Education <strong>of</strong> the<br />

land user<br />

Soil Type<br />

Agricultural<br />

Productivity<br />

Fertilizer<br />

Application<br />

Parcel Size<br />

Certified Maize<br />

Seed<br />

Models 4 and 5 were district specific versions <strong>of</strong> Model 1, which have also been reduced<br />

to m<strong>in</strong>imize possibility <strong>of</strong> misspecification. <strong>The</strong> results <strong>in</strong> both districts concur for<br />

variables such as: environmental degradation; education <strong>of</strong> the land user; slope <strong>of</strong> land;<br />

sex <strong>of</strong> land user and dra<strong>in</strong>age development. However, some <strong>of</strong> the results exhibit

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!