Table 3.
Estimated parameters.
| Explanatory variables | ESR model |
||
|---|---|---|---|
| First stage |
Second stage (Income per person, log)a |
||
| Beekeepers (1/0) |
Beekeepers |
Non-beekeepers |
|
| (1) | (2) | (3) | |
| Household knows friends and/or neighbours practising beekeeping (1/0) (Social network variable) | 0.811∗∗∗ | ||
| (0.171) | |||
| Household characteristics | |||
| Household size (log) | 0.041 | -0.663∗∗∗ | -0.740∗∗∗ |
| (0.212) | (0.108) | (0.129) | |
| Value of household assets (ETB) (log) | 0.448∗∗∗ | 0.288∗∗∗ | 0.092∗∗ |
| (0.085) | (0.052) | (0.038) | |
| Livestock ownership (TLU) (log) b | 0.223∗ | 0.151∗∗∗ | 0.058 |
| (0.127) | (0.056) | (0.052) | |
| Cell phone ownership (1/0)c | -0.144 | 0.125 | 0.098 |
| (0.171) | (0.081) | (0.099) | |
| Residence location altitude (metres above sea level, log) | 3.516 | -0.020 | -3.546∗∗ |
| (2.616) | (0.862) | (1.607) | |
| Characteristics of the household head | |||
| Age of household head (years) (log) | 0.342 | -0.091 | -0.025 |
| (0.282) | (0.159) | (0.159) | |
| Household head reads and writes (1/0) | 0.096 | 0.021 | 0.096 |
| (0.164) | (0.077) | (0.107) | |
| Household head received beekeeping training (1/0) | 0.328 | -0.124 | -0.062 |
| (0.286) | (0.104) | (0.201) | |
| Household head has marketable skills (1/0) | -0.291 | -0.287 | -0.453∗∗ |
| (0.320) | (0.214) | (0.214) | |
| Household head has access to market information (1/0) c | -0.152 | 0.028 | -0.047 |
| (0.170) | (0.079) | (0.109) | |
| Household head is aware of bees' benefits to pollination (1/0) | 0.222 | 0.038 | 0.011 |
| (0.152) | (0.070) | (0.099) | |
| North Mecha District (1/0) d | -0.586∗∗∗ | -0.383∗∗∗ | -1.112∗∗∗ |
| (0.219) | (0.134) | (0.279) | |
| Dangila District (1/0) | -0.582∗∗∗ | -0.411∗∗∗ | -0.620∗∗ |
| (0.215) | (0.100) | (0.277) | |
| Ankesha District (1/0) | -0.594∗∗∗ | -0.487∗∗∗ | -0.550∗∗ |
| -0.586∗∗∗ | -0.383∗∗∗ | -1.112∗∗∗ | |
| Constant | -31.524 | 7.936 | 36.170∗∗∗ |
| (20.124) | (6.733) | (12.319) | |
| Model statistics | |||
| 0.517∗∗∗ | 0.662∗∗∗ | ||
| (0.028) | (0.076) | ||
| -0.128 | -0.725∗∗∗ | ||
| (0.209) | (0.258) | ||
| Likelihood-ratio test () | 8.85∗∗ | ||
| Number of observations | 392 | 392 | 392 |
Note: ∗∗∗p < 0.01, ∗∗p < 0.05, ∗p < 0.1. Robust standard errors in parentheses. The models in columns (1) to (3) were estimated using full information maximum likelihood. The unit of analysis is Household.
a
The exchange rate was 26.1 ETB/USD in 2018.
b
TLU = tropical livestock unit.
c
Cell phone ownership and Access to market information variables were entered after empirically testing for the absence of multicollinearity. The variance inflation factor (VIF) was lower than 10 and the tolerance level (1/VIF) was above 0.1, confirming that multicollinearity was not a specification problem in the current data context.
d
The comparison group for the district fixed effects was Machakel.