IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2023) 14-2

Research article
erd

Assessing the Acceptability and the Feasibility of an
Agricultural Package of Technologies for Risk Managementin Southern Haiti
RIVAL VALCIN*
Graduate School of International Food and Agricultural Studies,Tokyo University of Agriculture, Japan
Email: rivalcing7@gmail.com

TOMOHIRO UCHIYAMA
Faculty of International Agriculture and Food Studies, Tokyo University of Agriculture, JapanKATSUMORI HATANAKA
Faculty of International Agriculture and Food Studies, Tokyo University of Agriculture, JapanYASUO OHE
Faculty of International Agriculture and Food Studies, Tokyo University of Agriculture, Japan

BENEDIQUE PAUL
Faculty of Agriculture and Environmental de Sciences, Quisqueya University, Haiti
Received 22 November 2023

Accepted 23 December 2023(*Corresponding Author)

Abstract Haitian farming faces serious climate risks. Losses due to hurricanes, droughts,
floods, and diseases seriously threaten productivity. This paper aimed to study the feasibility
and acceptability of agricultural technology packages that could help manage risk while
improving the productivity of farming in Haiti. Significant risks faced by farmers include
uninsurable disasters due to their systemic and catastrophic nature. Therefore, a package oftechnologies including a paid-in-kind "stabilization account" component may be an
appropriate financial tool for risk management. Are Haitian farmers open to such innovation?
To answer this question, we collected data from 28 agricultural experts and 1,400 farmers,
including 234 maize farmers in southern Haiti, and adopted the new product development(NPD) process to test the feasibility of the concept. We used the Spearman correlation,
multinomial logistic regression, and linear regression to determine factors affecting theopenness of Haitian farmers to innovation. We also conducted the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel
test to analyze the association between "financial inclusion" and "openness to innovation."
Based on the results, 70% of farmers expressed their willingness to pay 6% to more than 12%of their harvested crop as a stabilization account. Farmers with "financial inclusion" areexpected to be twice as likely to adopt innovative technologies, while farm size, gender,
household size, and revenue had a significant positive impact on openness to innovation.
However, contrary to the trends found in literature, we found that risk aversion may positively
affect the acceptance and adoption of some technologies. The results also suggest that, in
Haitian farming, risks linked to natural disasters are more strongly related to financial
incapacity than uncertainty. Therefore, access to proper just-in-time inputs complemented bya financial tool to overcome uncertainty will significantly boost the adaptability and resilienceof Haitian farmers toward climate risks.
Keywords climate risks, product development, stabilization account, technology adoption

INTRODUCTION
Natural hazards represent a severe issue disrupting farming activities in Haiti. Between 1990 and
2008, Haiti was the Caribbean country most affected by natural disasters (3 droughts, one epidemic,Ⓒ ISERD

122

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2023) 14-2

22 floods, 23 storms, and hurricanes) (Weissenberger, 2018). Regions with exceptionally highproduction in agriculture generally present higher vulnerability to natural risks and disasters(earthquakes, landslides, floods, hurricanes, and droughts) (UNDP, 2015). In the aftermath of
Hurricane Matthew in 2016, the agricultural sector was most affected; with losses and damages
estimated at 603.8 million dollars (around 4.3% of the country's GDP at the time), 80% of the
agricultural plantations were destroyed in its path (Icart, 2017). The southern peninsula of Haiti isparticularly exposed to tropical storms, hurricanes, floods, and landslides (IFAD, 2022). Haitian
agricultural producers, who already operate with inadequate working capital, additionally findthemselves confronted with various risks accelerating the process of decapitalization. Thus, anappropriate model of Haitian agriculture should put risk mitigation first (Bureau et al., 1994) because
exposure to uninsured risks is a proven major cause of low yields, slow growth, and persistent poverty(Carter et al., 2015). Over 20% of the country's GDP is from agriculture (Vansteenkiste, 2022);
therefore, the agricultural sector demands serious consideration despite its high-risk exposure.
Technology refers to tools and techniques or knowledge, ideas, and methods people use toachieve an activity (Dholey, 2019). In agriculture, climate-smart technology has been used for risk
mitigation, such as drought-resistant seed, rescheduling planting, and micro-irrigation (Tanti et al.,2022). Therefore, adopting technology (tools and techniques) for managing climate risk may be an
essential alternative for Haitian farmers. In addition, agribusiness firms supplying inputs to farmers
may need to provide new products and services. Thereby, this research provides insights relevant tothe acceptability and feasibility of integrating stabilization accounts in an agricultural package oftechnologies in Southern Haiti as tools and techniques for managing risks linked to climate hazards.
The southern peninsula of Haiti is particularly exposed to tropical storms, hurricanes, floods, andlandslides (IFAD, 2022). Previous works mention the risk aversion of Haitian farmers (Bureau et al.,1994) and its possible negative impact on technology adoption in general (Murray and Bannister,
2004; Macours et al., 2018). These works focused on lessons learned from agroforestry projects anda pilot phase of subsidizing technology transfer. For this reason, our study provides a specific viewof how adopting technology to manage hazards may be approached differently.
Armstrong et al. (2014) suggest eight (8) stages to develop a new product: idea generation, idea
screening, concept development and testing, marketing strategy development, business analysis,
product development, test marketing, and commercialization. As a feasibility study, this researchcovers the three initial phases of a new product development process (NPD), the purpose of which is
to find out whether Haitian farmers are willing to accept such innovation. Continuous anddiscontinuous innovations are inevitable for all business activities regarding productivity
improvement and risk management. The NPD process is suitable for continuous and discontinuous
innovation (Corso and Pellegrini, 2007); therefore, we focused on this process to guide ourmethodology.
In the remaining part of this work, after clarifying the content of the package of technologies,
we present a brief review of the "stabilization account," the study's objectives, the methodology used,
the results, the discussions, and the conclusions with some recommendations.
The package of technologies: It was demonstrated by Valcin and Uchiyama (2021) that an adequate
package of technologies has a significant positive impact on productivity in southern Haiti. This
package included plowing service, certified seed, fertilizers, irrigation, and pesticides. These inputs
would be provided to farmers in the contract framework as a loan. Besides, farmers mentioned thatclimate risk may prevent them from reimbursing their credit. This feedback is the basis for testing
the feasibility of including a financial tool, the “stabilization account,” as a risk management
component in the package.
A brief review of "stabilization accounts": Several approaches to agricultural insurance have been
implemented worldwide (Nair, 2010); each country finds a more suitable scheme based on its
situation (Kalfin et al., 2022). However, for countries or regions where catastrophic risks are frequent,risk management tools such as stabilization accounts for farmers are increasingly being considered(ČOP and Njavro, 2020).
According to Diaz-Caneja et al. (2009), "the stabilization accounts is a form of self-insurance.
They consist of individual accounts where farmers put in a certain amount of money every year.
Ⓒ ISERD

123

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2023) 14-2

Which they can withdraw in a year of big losses. Stabilization accounts can be based on yield,
revenue, or other indices." The stabilization accounts will be managed as a mutual fund. It is basedon the accumulation of reserves from participants' contribution (in kind, in our scenario) from which
members will receive support in the event of a loss according to the arrangement between farmers
and the managing company (Meuwissen et al., 2013; Kislingerova and Spika, 2022). Risks such as
drought and hurricanes are examples of systemic and complex for insurers to diversify (Kislingerova
and Spicka, 2022); they are hard to insure. Having a disaster-based stabilization account paid in kindas part of a mutual fund can be an excellent financial tool for managing risk for Haitian farmers. The
stabilization account is the most innovative aspect of this research. Its acceptability by farmers is theultimate purpose of this feasibility study. This alternative has been chosen instead of the traditional
form of agricultural insurance because we assume that Haitian farmers' most significant risks are
insurable.
Conceptual framework: The concept consists of an arrangement between firms and farms, throughwhich farmers will receive a package of technologies on credit from the firm after a subscription fee
is paid in kind. Farmers will repay the firm at harvest time by returning the crop-equivalent value ofthe granted package. According to a prior agreement, the firm will also buy the farmer's harvested
crop. The subscription fee paid in kind will be held as a contribution to the stabilization account ofeach farmer and will vary according to the plot size. We are testing the following concept: anagreement between the firm and the farm. This institutional arrangement will help farmers accesshigh-quality inputs on time and credit. We aim to reduce the inability to meet the crop calendar while
offering specific coverage in case of significant loss. Consequently, it is advantageous for firms toprovide risk management tools to their clients (farmers), as it helps to protect, increase, and sustain
their investment (Maggio and Sitko, 2019).
OBJECTIVESThis study assesses the Acceptability and Feasibility of Integrating Stabilization Accounts in an
Agricultural Package of Technologies among farmers in Southern Haiti. Specifically, the study aims
include: i) discovering the perception of Haitian agricultural experts on introducing a climate-smart
package of technologies to Haitian farmers, ii) identifying the relationship between farms andfarmers’ characteristics and the propensity to adopt new technologies, and iii) evaluating the Haitian
farmer’s willingness to pay (in-kind) for the agricultural new technologies (Disaster-based
Stabilization Account (DSA)) through a contractual agreement.
METHODOLOGY
Two categories of data were used in this research:Primary data: Besides the variables from the primary data that we used to analyze the determinantsof farmers’ openness to innovation, some additional variables necessary for the idea screening andthe concept testing, such as the willingness to accept and to pay, were collected in the summer of2022 in the framework of this study. Two samples were surveyed for this purpose: a sample of 28
Haitian agricultural experts and a sample of 234 farmers. A Google Form was used for data collection
among experts; however, a direct paper survey was distributed to farmers. Experts were asked to givethe concept a score (from 0-100%) based on the following criteria: “How much will the product meeta need? Will it offer superior in-use value? Can it be distinctively advertised? Will the product deliver
the expected sales volume, sales growth, and profit?” For each question, 70% was considered as thetarget to conclude validity. We adopted this methodology from Toubia and Florès (2007). This
information was explicitly used to conduct a qualitative analysis. In addition, key informants wereinterviewed for a comprehensive understanding of the sector. This sub sample includes the Directorof the Organization for the Rehabilitation of the Environment (ORE), the Dean of the Faculty ofAgricultural Sciences and Environment at Quisqueya University (FSAE/UniQ), the Director of theAgro-socio-economy of FSAE/UniQ, a former employee of the Financing and Agricultural InsuranceⒸ ISERD

124

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2023) 14-2

System in Haiti (SYFAAH), an employee of the Industrial Development Fund (FDI), and an
employee of Haitian Foundation for Sustainable Agricultural Development (FONHDAD). They wereasked to give their expert opinion, on the importance, the advantages, inconveniences, and challengesof the proposed package concept. Primary data were collected from farmers in the Sud district ofHaiti; however, secondary data also cover an additional district called Artibonite (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1 Location of the study area
Secondary data: In the fall of 2022 and winter of 2021, a survey targeting more than 1,200 farmers
was conducted by Quisqueya University and the Ministry of Agriculture in Haiti, funded by theInteramerican Development Bank. Until our study, this database remained unused for similar
research purposes. Variables related to our objectives found in this database were used in this paper.
This information enabled us to make a quantitative analysis, including modeling and previsions.
For data analysis, multinomial logistic regression and the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test wereused through the Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS). The techniques were used
respectively to analyze factors affecting openness to innovation and the association between financial
inclusion and openness to innovation. The New product development process is used as the guideline
for this research project. Three steps are taken in this paper: ideation, idea screening, and concept
testing.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONSThe General Situation of Haitian Farmers
The interview with key informants revealed that farmers usually begin in risky agricultural
timeframes because of their inability to start their cultural operations on time. The crop calendar isso tight in Haiti that even slight delays may lead the farmer into the beginning of spring's heavy rainor the cyclonic season (June to November). Our study defines uncertainty as a lack of knowledge ordata on future events based on Machiels' findings (Machiels, 2023). In Haitian farming, risks linked
to natural disasters seem more correlated with financial incapability to observe an ideal crop calendar
than general uncertainty.
Expert Perception of the Firm-Farm Concept
For the idea screening, each expert surveyed was an agronomist. Among the 28 experts, 16participants had 10 to 38 years of experience, and 9 participants had experience working in financial
institutions. They were asked to score the firm-farm concept (from 0 to 100%) based on the questions
from Table 1.

Ⓒ ISERD

125

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2023) 14-2

Table 1 Screening result of the concept according to expert point of view
Score
Level
100%
92%
59%
60%
86%

Label / Indicator
Will the product meet a need?
Does the product offer superior in-use value?
Can the product be distinctively advertised?
Does the company have the necessary know-how and capital?
Will the product deliver the expected sales volume, sales growth, and profit?

Validity
High
High
Fair
Fair
High

Note: Number of respondents=28, Source: Survey by authors, 2022

When questioned about the possibility of success, in terms of acceptability, adoption, and profit,
their answers were as illustrated in Fig. 2.

7%
25%

Possibility of wide acceptation andprofit7%

Certitude of wide acceptation andprofit61%

Fairly accepted but not profitable
Possibility wide acceptation but notprofitable

Fig. 2 Experts’ points of view on the prospective success of the concept
Results shown in Table 1 and Fig. 2 suggest that experts highly score the concept's potential
ability to meet a need, its superior in-use value, and its expected financial success. However, it will
require more effort to build awareness and may require additional know-how and capital. These
efforts do not limit the concept quality as innovation is always costly, risky, and requires knowledge
capital (Laperche, 2013; Zambon and Monciardini, 2015).
Farms and Farmers' Characteristics and the Propensity to Adopt New Technologies
In this section, we highlight a key finding suggesting that aversion to risk linked to natural hazards
may boost the propensity to adopt new technologies to mitigate those risks. This could be considereda sort of risk preference influenced by loss aversion (Filiz et al., 2020). Many factors have alreadybeen identified for their impact on technology adoption. Some of them have been confirmed in the
Haitian farmer's framework; some factors have been expressed differently. Farmers from this area
are not significantly different in education level since most have only completed primary education.
Table 2 shows how the relevant factors affect their openness to innovation.
Table 2 Factors affecting the openness of farmers to technology for risk management
GenderAge
Revenue
Farm Size
Household Size
Org. Membership
Constant

B
-.463
-.004
.000
.985
.113
-.365
.322

S.E.
.172
.005
.000
.203
.041
.135
.330

Wald
7.200
.714
16.82423.491
7.441
7.300
.954

df
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

Sig.
.007
.398
.000
.000
.006
.007
.329

Exp(B)
.630
.996
1.000
2.677
1.119
.694
1.380

Note: Dependent variable: Openness to innovation; Number of respondents: 1078. The model was well fitted as shown by
the Omnibus Tests of Coefficients (Chi-square: 83.8; Sig.: .000) and the Hosmer and Lemeshow Test (Chi-square:
10.3; Sig.: 0.244). However, the Nagelkerke R Square was relatively low (0.10), therefore including more variablesin the model might increase the explanatory power.
Source: Computed from FSAE-UniQ data by the authorsⒸ ISERD

126

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2023) 14-2

Female Haitian farmers were more likely to accept new technologies, which is opposite to thefindings of Doss (2001) who found that female African farmers were less likely than their malecounterparts to adopt improved crop varieties and management systems. However, this result is inline with what was observed in Zimbabwe (Masuka et al., 2016), as well as a New Zealand case
(Brown and Roper, 2017).
Farmers with a higher revenue were more capable of affording new technologies; by acquiring
good quality or lasting tools, they enact changes less frequently than farmers with lower revenue. In
addition, low-revenue farmers have much to lose; adoption decisions appear rational. Therefore, if
there is no direct benefit, farmers will not adopt (Suri, 2011).
Household size could affect the decision to positively adopt new technology. Suppose the newtechnology will require additional routine maintenance and operation. In that case, it may be more
adapted to a bigger family (Uhunamure et al., 2019). However, if it is seen as an opportunity todiminish labor, it will be more attractive to smaller households.
Like the Haitian case, most studies agreed on a farm size’s positive effect on technology
adoption because, in many cases, technologies help farmers reduce the cost and difficulties of farmoperations (Gargiulo et al., 2018). However, Mwangi and Kariuki (2015) suggest a mixed effect.
Ultimately, having affiliation with some local organization or being part of a farmers' association
is known to influence the adoption of new technology (Ruzzante et al., 2021). However, in somecases, the effect may differ based on the type of technology (Buyinza and Wambede, 2008; Chuchird
et al., 2017); these groups will also influence individual decisions.
Association Between Openness to Innovation and Financial Inclusion“Having a bank account” is critical evidence of “financial inclusion” (Karlan and Morduch, 2009;
Brune et al., 2016; Grohmann et al., 2018). The Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel was used to analyze theassociation between financial inclusion and openness to innovation using a sample of 1,078 Haitian
farmers included in the original survey data. They were asked whether they had owned a savings
account within the past five years. Table 3 shows a significant association between “financial
inclusion” and the “Openness to Innovation.” According to the estimated Odds ratio, a farmer with“financial inclusion” tends to be 1.5 times more disposed to accept and use new technologies. A
farmer who is open to new technology and has financial inclusion will be a potential target for thedeveloping concept.
Table 3 Crosstabulation and tests of conditional independence

Oppenness
Total

No
Yes

Financialinclusion
No
Yes
367
159
333
219

Total
526
552

Cochran-MantelHaenszel test

702

1,078

Est. odds ratio

378

Chisquareddf

Asymp.
sig (2-sided)

10.55410.134

1
1

.001
.001

1.518

.001

Source: Computed from FSAE-UniQ data by the authors

With the integration of the financial component (disaster-based stabilization account) for risk
management, farmers must have a bank account to join the contract. Therefore, it is a good antecedent
for farmers to have financial inclusion history because it enhances access to financial services suchas credit and insurance (Peprah et al., 2020).
Farmer’s Willingness to Pay (In-kind) for Agricultural New Technologies (WSA)
At the beginning of all interviews, the concept features were explained in detail to farmers, as
described in the conceptual framework section. Then, we asked questions concerning theirunderstanding of the concept, willingness to accept the agreement, and willingness to pay in-kind as
an account deposit. Respondents were primarily male (91%) and between 22 and 82 years old,
Ⓒ ISERD

127

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2023) 14-2

averaging 47.5 years old. They had anywhere from 0 to 17 years of schooling, with 32% having atleast seven years (up to the secondary level). As a result, seventy percent of farmers express apropensity to accept the arrangement by paying from approximately 6% to more than 12 % of theharvested crop as a stabilization account, as shown in Fig. 3. This percentage refers to thesubscription fee which will be held in the stabilization account. This contribution will return to thefarmer in the event of a qualifying natural hazard as stipulated in the agreement.

Fig. 3 The percentage that farmers are ready to pay from their harvest
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONSThis study proposes a systemic approach by including risk management tools and techniques in a
package of technologies. The latter includes appropriate inputs, including credit and a stabilizationaccount as financial tools for risk management. The stabilization accounts were chosen instead of the
traditional form of agricultural insurance because major risks affecting Haitian farming are complex
to insure due to their systemic and catastrophic character. Interviews and surveys were conducted toassess the arrangement's acceptability and feasibility. The main results were as follows:i. Haitian agricultural experts and farmers favor the concept and predict its financial success.
ii. Farmers expressed a high propensity to pay up to 12% of their harvested crop as a stabilizationaccount. Therefore, the concept successfully passes the screening and testing phases of its
development. The results convey some evidence of its acceptability and feasibility in Haitian
farming.
iii. "Financial inclusion" plays an essential role in financial technology adoption; farmers withfinancial inclusion will be two times more open to innovative technologies. Thus, prioritizing
farmers with bank accounts may guarantee higher success rates during concept implementation.
iv. In Haitian farming, risks linked to natural disasters are more related to financial incapacity thanuncertainty. Therefore, if farmers could adhere to the crop calendar, that would be a significant
step towards risk mitigation in Haitian farming.
As per the above results, the following recommendations were given:
1. The implementation of this concept should be started with a limited group of farmers, preferably
young, literate, and financially included. This small group will be used as a model for potential
scaling.
2. A clear explanation or a demonstration of any concept to the potential buyers (farmers in theframework of this study) will enhance its probability of acceptance and adoption. That will bevery important in promoting new technologies to Haitian farmers.
3. A paid-in-kind stabilization account worth 7% to 10% of the farmer's harvested crop or about
180 kg of maize equivalent will be affordable for most farmers.
Limitations of the Study
The study could not provide more information regarding the viability aspect of the concept feasibility.
A subsequent study should focus on developing a cross-sector business model demonstrating theconcept's viability.

Ⓒ ISERD

128

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2023) 14-2

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This research has been funded by followings.
The Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology (MEXT) of Japan, Tokyo
Nodai Research Institute (TNRI), The Research and Development Fund (FRD) of the Haitian Central
Bank (BRH), (BRH) PITAG/MARNDR through CHIBAS/UniQ/Partners.
REFERENCES
Ahmed, H. and Anang, B.T. 2019. Does farmer group membership enhance technology adoption, Empiricalevidence from Tolon District of Ghana. Review of Agricultural and Applied Economics, 2, 26-32, Retrieved
from DOI https://doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.293644
Armstrong, G., Adam, S., Denize, S. and Kotler, P. 2014. Principles of marketing. Pearson, Australia.
Brown, P. and Roper, S. 2017. Innovation and networks in New Zealand farming. Australian Journal of
Agricultural and Resource Economics, 61 (3), 422-442, Retrieved from DOI https://doi.org/10.1111/14678489.12211
Bureau, J.C. and Thierry, P. 1994. Réponse au point de vue de Jean-Marc Boussard sur « Splendeur et misèrede l'économétrie». Économie rurale, 224 , 61-64. (in French)
Buyinza, M. and Wambede, N. 2008. Extension for agroforestry technology adoption, Mixed intercropping ofcrotolaria (Crotolaria grahamiana) and maize (Zea mays L.) in Kabale district, Uganda. Environmental
Research Journal, 2 (3), 131-137.
Carter, M., Alain, j., Elisabeth, S. and Alexander, S. 2015. Assurance climatique indicielle pour les pays endéveloppement, Examen des faits et propositions visant à augmenter le taux de souscription. Revued'Economie du Développement, 23, 5-57, Retrieved from DOI https://doi.org/10.3917/edd.291.0005 (inFrench)Chuchird, R., Sasaki, N. and Abe, I. 2017. Influencing factors of the adoption of agricultural irrigation
technologies and the economic returns, A case study in Chaiyaphum Province, Thailand. Sustainability, 9(9), 1524, Retrieved from DOI https://doi.org/10.3390/su9091524
Corso, M. and Pellegrini, L. 2007. Continuous and discontinuous innovation, Overcoming the innovator
dilemma. Creativity and Innovation Management, 16 (4), 333-347, Retrieved from DOI https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8691.2007.00459.x
Dholey, S. 2019. Impact of technology on organizational development and employability. International Journalof Advance and Innovative Research, 6 (1), 369-371, Retrieved from URL https://iaraedu.com/pdf/ijairvolume-6-issue-1-xxiv-january-march-2019.pdf
Diaz-Caneja, M.B., Conte, C.G., Pinilla, F.G., Stroblmair, J., Catenaro, R. and Dittmann, C. 2009. Risk
management and agricultural insurance schemes in Europe. Joint Research Centre, Institute for theProtection and Security of the Citizen, Retrieved from URL https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2788/24307
Doss, C.R. 2001. Designing agricultural technology for African women farmers, Lessons from 25 years ofexperience. World Development, 29 (12), 2075-2092, Retrieved from DOI https://doi.org/10.1016/S0305750X(01)00088-2
Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). 2019. Increasing resilience of vulnerable farmers in Southern Haiti.
Retrieved from URL https://www.greenclimate.fund/document/increasing-resilience-vulnerable-farmerssouthern-haiti
Gargiulo, J.I., Eastwood, C.R., Garcia, S.C. and Lyons, N.A. 2018. Dairy farmers with larger herd sizes adopt
more precision dairy technologies. Journal of Dairy Science, 101 (6), 5466-5473. Retrieved from DOI
https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2017-13324.
Grohmann, A., Klühs, T. and Menkhoff, L. 2018. Does financial literacy improve financial inclusion, Cross
country evidence. World Development, 111, 84-96. Retrieved from DOI https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
worlddev.2018.06.020
Hennessy, T. and Heanue, K. 2012. Quantifying the effect of discussion group membership on technology
adoption and farm profit on dairy farms. The Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension, 18 (1), 4154, Retrieved from DOI https://doi.org/10.1080/1389224X.2012.638784
Icart, J.C. 2017. Haïti après l’ouragan Matthew. Relations, 788, 10-11, Retrieved from URL https://id.erudit.
org/iderudit/84236ac
International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD). 2022. Haiti, Context, Retrieved from URL https://www.ifad.org/en/web/operations/w/country/haitiⒸ ISERD

129

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2023) 14-2

Kalfin, Sukono, Supian, S. and Mamat, M. 2022. Insurance as an alternative for sustainable economic recovery
after natural disasters, A systematic literature review. Sustainability, 14 (7), 4349, Retrieved from DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/su14074349
Kislingerová, S. and Špička, J. 2022. Factors influencing the take-up of agricultural insurance and the entry
into the mutual fund, A case study of the Czech Republic. Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 15(8), 366. Retrieved from DOI https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm15080366
Laperche, B. 2013. Knowledge-capital and innovation. In Carayannis, E.G. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Creativity,
Invention, Innovation and Entrepreneurship. Springer, New York, NY, Retrieved from DOI https://doi.
org/10.1007/978-1-4614-3858-8_303
Machiels, T. 2023. Real options for real urban projects, Uncertainty and adaptive planning in complex spatial
projects. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Antwerp.
Macours, K., Stein, D., Salazar, L., Gachot, S., Jacquet, B., Fahsbender, J. and Wright, K. 2018. Technology
transfer to small farmers program (PTTA) in Haiti, Implementation, evaluation and lessons learned. InterAmerican Development Bank, Retrieved from DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.18235/0001100
Maggio, G. and Sitko, N. 2019. Knowing is half the battle, Seasonal forecasts, adaptive cropping systems, andthe mediating role of private markets in Zambia. Food Policy, 89, 101781, Retrieved from DOI https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2019.101781
Masuka, B., Matenda, T., Chipomho, J., Mapope, N., Mupeti, S., Tatsvarei, S. and Ngezimana, W. 2016. Mobile
phone use by small-scale farmers, A potential to transform production and marketing in Zimbabwe. South
African Journal of Agricultural Extension, 44 (2), 121-135, Retrieved from URL http://www.scielo.org.za/pdf/sajae/v44n2/11.pdf
Meuwissen, M.P.M., Assefa, T.A. and van Asseldonk, M.A.P.M. 2013. Supporting insurance in European
agriculture, Experience of mutuals in the Netherlands. EuroChoices, 12 (3), 10-16, Retrieved from DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/1746-692X.12034
Murray, G.F. and Bannister, M.E. 2004. Peasants, agroforesters and anthropologists, A 20-year venture inincome-generating trees and hedgerows in Haiti. Agroforestry Systems, 61, 383-397, Retrieved from DOI
https://doi.org/10.1023/B:AGFO.0000029012.28818.0c
Mwangi, M. and Kariuki, S. 2015. Factors determining adoption of new agricultural technology by smallholder
farmers in developing countries. Journal of Economics and Sustainable Development, 6 (5), 208-216,
Retrieved from URL https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/234646919.pdf
Nair, R. 2010. Crop insurance in India, Changes and challenges. Economic and Political Weekly, 45 (6), 1922.
Peprah, J.A., Koomson, I., Sebu, J. and Bukari, C. 2020. Improving productivity among smallholder farmers
in Ghana, Does financial inclusion matter? Agricultural Finance Review, 81 (4), 481-502, Retrieved from
DOI https://doi.org/10.1108/AFR-12-2019-0132
Polson, R.A. and Spencer, D.S. 1991. The technology adoption process in subsistence agriculture, The case of
cassava in Southwestern Nigeria. Agricultural Systems, 36 (1), 65-78, Retrieved from DOI doi.org/10.
1016/0308-521X(91)90108-M
Rola‐Rubzen, M. F., Paris, T., Hawkins, J. and Sapkota, B. 2020. Improving gender participation in agricultural
technology adoption in Asia, From rhetoric to practical action. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy,
42 (1), 113-125, Retrieved from DOI https://doi.org/10.1002/aepp.13011
Ruzzante, S., Labarta, R. and Bilton, A. 2021. Adoption of agricultural technology in the developing world, A
meta-analysis of the empirical literature. World Development, 146, 105599. Retrieved from DOI https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2021.105599
Suri, T. 2011. Selection and comparative advantage in technology adoption. Econometrica, 79 (1), 159-209.
Retrieved from DOI https://doi.org/10.3982/ECTA7749
Tanti, P.C., Jena, P.R. and Aryal, J.P. 2022. Role of institutional factors in climate‐smart technology adoption
in agriculture, Evidence from an Eastern Indian state. Environmental Challenges, 7, 100498, Retrieved
from DOI https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envc.2022.100498
Toubia, O. and Florès, L. 2007. Adaptive idea screening using consumers. Marketing Science, 26 (3), 342-360,
Retrieved from DOI https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.1070.0273
Uhunamure, S.E., Nethengwe, N.S. and Tinarwo, D. 2019. Correlating the factors influencing household
decisions on adoption and utilisation of biogas technology in South Africa. Renewable and Sustainable
Energy Reviews, 107, 264-273, Retrieved from DOI https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2019.03.006
United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). 2015. Estimation des coûts des impacts du changement
climatique en Haïti. Retrieved from URL https://www.undp.org/sites/g/files/zskgke326/files/migration/ht/UNDP-HT-ProEnv-EtuEconoCC.pdf (in French)
Valcin, R. and Uchiyama T. 2021. Effective farm business strategy for local commodities in Haiti, Case ofmaize. Études Caribéennes, 49, Retrieved from DOI https://doi.org/10.4000/etudescaribeennes.21669Ⓒ ISERD

130

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2023) 14-2

Vansteenkiste, J. 2022. Gender in the world food economy, Inequitable transformation of Haiti’s foodeconomy. Food Policy Environments: Discursive Effects, Material Consequences, 7, Retrieved from DOI
https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2022.755994
Weissenberger, S. 2018. Haïti, Vulnérabilité, résilience et changements climatiques. Haïti Perspectives, 6 (3),19-26, Retrieved from URL http://www.haiti-perspectives.com/pdf/6.3-sebastian.pdf (in French)
Zambon, S. and Monciardini, D. 2015. Intellectual capital and innovation, A guideline for future research.
Journal of Innovation Economics and Management, 17 (2), 13-26. Retrieved from DOI https://doi.org/
10.3917/jie.017.0013Ⓒ ISERD

131