Files
Abstract
While agriculture is integral to the development plans of many developing countries, the sector and those who work in it face several challenges. Additionally, even though agricultural extension and advisory service (AEAS) is prescribed as essential to addressing some of these challenges, the evidence base is thin, especially in Ghana, where most existing studies are based on cross-sectional, regional, and small-sample analyses. The absence of rigorous and generalizable analyses limits evidence-informed advocacy, planning, and decision-making on AEAS. To address this evidence gap, we analyze the effects of AEAS on poverty, assets, per capita consumption, and dietary diversity based on three waves of the nationally representative Ghana Socioeconomic Panel Survey. We find that AEAS is associated with a 28.3% increase in household and farm assets, 20% increase in value of per capita food consumption, and a 4.2% increase in household dietary diversity. Disaggregated by provider type, we also find that households receiving extension service advice from farmer-based organizations show the highest increase across these welfare outcomes. Despite these positive effects, our results show that the uptake of AEAS is generally low and especially from service providers other than government sources. Furthermore, those who received AEAS show null or negative results for poverty. These findings add to the body of evidence on the positive effects of access to agriculture advisory. We recommend that the government further strengthen the extension service system, specifically by encouraging uptake of extension services from government and non-government providers.