Impacts of aflatoxin contamination on livelihoods of the poor households
Impacts of aflatoxin contamination on livelihoods of the poor households Marites Tiongco, IFPRI on behalf of the Aflacontrol team November 30, 2011International Food Policy Research Institute Uniformed Services University of the Health SciencesInternational Center for the Improvement of Maize ACDI/VOCA/Kenya Maize Development Programand Wheat Kenya Agricultural Research InstituteInternational Crops Research Institute for the Semi- Institut d’Economie RuraleArid Tropics The Eastern Africa Grain CouncilUniversity of Pittsburgh
Used semi-structuredinterviews and focus groupdiscussions(value chainapproach):• Role of maize in people’s livelihoods (diversified by gender)• Production, storage, marketing practices• Sources of information regarding inputs, improving production practices, disease, market information Kenya – 6 villages – 3 east; 3 west• Knowledge about aflatoxin risk
• Conducted household surveys t o 1344 HHs in Kenya (from 120 sublocations in 6 AEZ)+ 300 HHs from prevalence sample;• Main objective is to assess the effect of “aflatoxin contamination” on income and wealth.• We take the farm household as the unit of analysis• Treat aflatoxin contamination as a negative externality to the production function• Measure health costs and production costs (including aflatoxin contamination)
Number of households Number of per Number of sublocation sublocaton householdLowland Tropics 15 6 90Dry mid-altitudes 18 12 217Dry transitional 18 12 203MoistTransitional 30 12 354Moist Mid-altitudes 20 12 240Highlands 20 12 240total 1344 Sample of 217 HHs from districts that experienced aflatoxicosis outbreak in 2004 in Kenya—151 HHs are in dry transitional and 66 are in dry mid altitude)
dry mid-altitutes moist mid-altitudes lowland tropics dry transitional moist transitional high tropics 0 2 4 6 8 p 50 of hfiasNote: The Household Food Insecurity Index (Coates et al) ranges from 0 -27 with 0 being the least food insecure and 27 being the most foodinsecure. Given the food insecurity situation, the most vulnerable todemand shocks would be the poorest among the poor HHs.
Low Dry Mid- Dry Moist High Moist Mid- All Tropics altitudes Transitional Transitional Tropics altitudes Households50% loss inproduction +50% fall in price 17% 21% 18% 12% 13% 16% 14%50% reductionin price of maize 11% 14% 12% 8% 8% 11% 10%70% reductionin price of maize 16% 20% 17% 11% 12% 15% 14%50% increase inprice (effect onnet buyers) 32% 63% 54% 30% 46% 37% 30% Note: Income changes are higher for those HHs with higher share of income from maize; income effects on average are small
Share of income from maize production to total household income on average is small because of diversified income sources Income changes are higher for those households with higher share of income from maize Income effects due to price changes are significant relative to maize income increase in prices affects net buyers more
Estimate the productivity loss in terms of human health effects Investigate if there are differences in income effects between high risk and low risk areas using prevalence data
¿Le ha llamado la atención una diapositiva en particular?
Recortar diapositivas es una manera útil de recopilar información importante para consultarla más tarde.