Agricultural and Food Economics

Table 10 Effects of food-for-work participation on production diversity

From: Implications of food-for-work programs for consumption and production diversity: Evidence from the Tigray Region of Ethiopia

	Fixed effects	Random effects	DID^b
	Model 2A	Model 2B	Model 2C
FFW participant (0/1)	0.04	0.05	− 0.06
FFW participant (0/1)	(0.08)	(0.06)	(0.06)
Age of household head (years)	− 0.003	0.003	− 0.004
Age of household head (years)	(0.005)	(0.002)	(0.005)
Female-headed household (0/1)	0.10	− 0.04	0.06
Female-headed household (0/1)	(0.16)	(0.08)	(0.14)
Education of head (0/1)	0.05	0.16**	− 0.07
Education of head (0/1)	(0.13)	(0.07)	(0.10)
Adult female labor (#)	− 0.04	0.03	− 0.05
Adult female labor (#)	(0.06)	(0.04)	(0.05)
Adult male labor (#)	0.02	0.04	0.01
Adult male labor (#)	(0.05)	(0.03)	(0.04)
Children (#)	0.02	0.06**	− 0.01
Children (#)	(0.04)	(0.02)	(0.03)
Land area owned (Tsimdi) ^a	0.08***	0.04***	0.05***
Land area owned (Tsimdi) ^a	(0.02)	(0.01)	(0.01)
Livestock owned (TLUs)	0.04**	0.05***	− 0.01
Livestock owned (TLUs)	(0.02)	(0.01)	(0.01)
Off-farm income (0/1)	0.16**	0.10	0.09
Off-farm income (0/1)	(0.08)	(0.06)	(0.06)
2003	− 0.19*	− 0.19**
2003	(0.10)	(0.09)
2006	0.12	0.16*	0.36***
2006	(0.10)	(0.09)	(0.11)
2010	0.14	0.15*	0.36***
2010	(0.10)	(0.09)	(0.09)
Zone 2		0.01
Zone 2		(0.09)
Zone 3		0.29***
Zone 3		(0.09)
Zone 4		0.04
Zone 4		(0.09)
Zone 5		− 0.51***
Zone 5		(0.18)
Constant	2.10***	1.69***	2.38***
Constant	(0.38)	(0.21)	(0.07)
Number of obs.	1426	1426	912
Number of groups	514	514	371
R² (overall)	0.05	0.10	0.04

Standard errors in parentheses. * significant at 10%; ** significant at 5%; *** significant at 1%. ^a1 Tsimdi = 0.25 ha; Hausman test (χ² = 27.0, p-value = 0.01); ^bIn the DID model, standard errors are clustered by household ID

Back to article page