IHSN Survey Catalog
  • Home
  • Microdata Catalog
  • Citations
  • Login
    Login
    Home / Central Data Catalog / ARM_2007_MCC-WMFT_V01_M
central

Water to Market Farmer Training 2007-2011

Armenia, 2007 - 2011
Get Microdata
Reference ID
ARM_2007_MCC-WMFT_v01_M
Producer(s)
Mathematica Policy Research, Inc.,
Metadata
DDI/XML JSON
Created on
Jul 07, 2015
Last modified
Mar 29, 2019
Page views
13568
Downloads
1440
  • Study Description
  • Data Dictionary
  • Downloads
  • Get Microdata
  • Related Publications
  • Identification
  • Version
  • Scope
  • Coverage
  • Producers and sponsors
  • Sampling
  • Survey instrument
  • Data collection
  • Data processing
  • Data appraisal
  • Access policy
  • Data Access
  • Contacts
  • Metadata production
  • Identification

    Survey ID number

    ARM_2007_MCC-WMFT_v01_M

    Title

    Water to Market Farmer Training 2007-2011

    Country
    Name Country code
    Armenia ARM
    Study type

    Independent Impact Evaluation

    Abstract

    The Farming Practices Survey (FPS) was commissioned by MCC to evaluate the impact of Water-to-Market (WtM) activities, particularly farmer training, on rural farmers in Armenia. Fielded by a consortium of AREG, an Armenia-based NGO, and Jen Consult, the FPS is a longitudinal survey of farming households interviewed at three points in time. FPS1 was conducted in 2007, before farmer training began. A second round was conducted one year after training began. Data from the second round is not included in this package. FPS3, the final round, was conducted three years after training began. This public-use file includes de-identified data from respondents to FPS3 and FPS1.

    Households were selected for FPS1 interviews based on their likelihood of participating in WtM training, as assessed by mayors using criteria provided by the survey team. This process was used so that the surveyed households would include a high proportion of WtM participants. Each round of the FPS asked each household about their cropping patterns, irrigation and agricultural practices, crop yields, agricultural revenues and costs, other household expenditures, household employment, and other sources of household income.

    Kind of Data

    Sample survey data [ssd]

    Unit of Analysis

    The units of analysis are individuals, families/households, and communities.

    Version

    Version Description

    Edited clean data for internal use only

    Scope

    Topics
    Topic Vocabulary
    Agriculture & Rural Development World Bank
    Water World Bank
    Poverty World Bank
    Impact Evaluation World Bank
    Keywords
    On-farm water management High-value agriculture Irrigation Agriculture Rural Farm investment

    Coverage

    Geographic Coverage

    Rural areas in the 10 Armenian marzes excepting Yerevan.

    Universe

    The survey covered farming households in rural communities that were included in the evaluation sample for the Water-to-Market impact evaluation.

    Producers and sponsors

    Primary investigators
    Name
    Mathematica Policy Research, Inc.
    Funding Agency/Sponsor
    Name
    Millennium Challenge Corporation

    Sampling

    Sampling Procedure

    The evaluation design for the WtM activities dictated the sampling frame and approach to the FPS. The target was to complete interviews with approximately 25 farmers in each of 189 village clusters that was selected to be in the evaluation of WtM training. Village clusters consist of up to 4 small, neighboring villages, and the 189 selected village clusters cover 211 villages. The village clusters are indicated in the variable "clusteringcode_b".

    The baseline survey did not randomly sample respondents from the village clusters. The field team identified respondents for the FPS by working with village mayors to identify farmers who were likely to participate in WtM training so that a high proportion of farmers who were interviewed would have participated in training. The criteria were designed to align with the characteristics of farmers participating in ACDI's training programs, most notably, being actively engaged in farming, having modest farm area, living in the community for several years, and being between 25 and 70 years old.

    AREG updated the sample list with the assistance of village mayors and marz officials, either at the marz offices or in the village itself. AREG and mayors targeted the households of farmers who were actively engaged in farming and had lived in the community for several years. Ultimately, a total of 4,715 farming households were interviewed for FPS1 in relevant communities. These same households were targeted for FPS3, which acheived a response rate of 75%.

    Deviations from the Sample Design

    Three villages that were originally sampled for the FPS were not surveyed at final follow-up. Two villages that were surveyed at baseline were not surveyed at final follow-up because they were found to have almost no active farmers. A third village was not accessible for the baseline FPS due to heavy snow. The rest of the villages in these WUAs were surveyed at baseline and final follow-up according to the sample design.

    For FPS3, MCA-Armenia also added the objective of surveying recipients of MCA credit. As a result, the FPS3 was administered to 33 new farmers who had not been interviewed in FPS1 and had received MCA credit.

    Response Rate

    The FPS3 was administered to 3,547 households, 75 percent of households that participated in FPS1.

    Weighting

    Nonresponse weights were constructed to account for households that responded to FPS1 and did not respond to FPS3. The variable "nonresp_wt" contains these weights. The nonresponse weights were computed by first calculating the propensity of a household's nonresponse in the FPS3. The second step in creating nonresponse weights was to use the predicted values from the response propensity models to create weighting cells. Within each research group (treatment and control), five weighting cells were created that were determined by the size of the predicted likelihood that the household responded to the survey. This resulted in a total of 10 (5 x 2) weighting cells. The same nonresponse weight was assigned within each of these 10 cells.

    The third step was to create the nonresponse weight for each cell. The nonresponse weight was calculated by dividing the total number of households in each cell by the total number of households that responded to the survey in each cell. Finally, the weights were rescaled such that the sum of weights for the treatment group and the sum of weights for the control group each equal the original sample size of 4,715. Additional details of the calculations of nonresponse weights are provided in Appendix A of the Water-to-Market Evaluation report, which is provided as a resource document.

    Survey instrument

    Questionnaires

    There is one questionnaire for the FPS3. The FPS3 is based on the questionnaire used in FPS1 and the Integrated Survey of Living Standards (ISLS) implemented annually by the National Statistical Service of Armenia (NSS). The FPS3 is published in Armenian and English. It is intended to be administered to the person in the household with the most knowledge of farming activities on the household's land holdings. The FPS3 and FPS1 are provided as external resources.

    The FPS3 was designed with guidance from MCA-Armenia, MCC, and Mathematica. Relative to FPS1, FPS3 has some minor changes in structure and an additional section on agricultural credit. In addition to questions regarding agricultural credit, the FPS3 asks about various demographic and socioeconomic characteristics for each member of the household, including sex, age, relationship, education level, and occupation. At the household level, the FPS3 asks the respondent about agricultural trainings, land holdings, agricultural practices, production of major crops, agricultural sales and revenues, income, and expenses.

    Data collection

    Dates of Data Collection
    Start End Cycle
    2007-11-15 2008-02-21 Round 1
    2008-11-04 2009-02-07 Round 2
    2010-12-09 2011-03-15 Round 3
    Data Collectors
    Name
    Jen Finance, Engineering, and Management Consult Ltd. with AREG Scientific Cultural Youth Association Non-Governmental Organization
    Supervision

    The thirty interviewers were divided into 5 groups, each led by a field coordinator. The Administrative Assistant to the Team Leader at AREG supervised the fieldwork and observed several interviews in the field. The field coordinators reported at least weekly to the Team Leader, Senior Researcher, and Administrative Assistant to the Team Leader at AREG.

    The role of the Team Leader was to manage all aspects of the pre-test, sample verification, and data collection. The Team Leader also communicated the progress of the fieldwork with MCA-Armenia and MPR.

    The role of the Senior Researcher was to provide guidance on survey implementation, pre-tests, and revisions to the FPS3. The Senior Researcher was also responsible for interviewer training and developing the data processing and quality control approaches.

    The Administrative Assistant to the Team Leader was responsible for selecting the interviewers, scheduling interviewers, and supervising fieldwork coordinators, the sample verification team, and the quality control team.

    Data Collection Notes

    Thirty interviewers and two reserve interviewers were selected from AREG to administer the FPS3. AREG selected the interviewers based on prior experience administering FPS1 and FPS2, geographic location, and prior experience conducting surveys in rural areas. The interviewers were trained in early December of 2010 to administer FPS3. The training provided interviewers with an overview of the study and the questionnaire. Topics in training included sample verification, identifying and coding skips in the sampling lists, and validity checks on completed questionnaires and other materials. Bilingual interviewers were available to conduct the FPS3 in Armenian or Russian, and the FPS3 was pre-tested from October to November of 2010.

    Interviewers reported at least weekly to supervisors (Team Leader, Administrative Assistant to the Team Leader, and Senior Researcher) at AREG. In turn, AREG submitted detailed reports to Mathematica and MCA-Armenia regularly and after finishing fieldwork in each marz. Separate teams were designated for sample verification and quality control.

    The fieldwork began by sending a letter describing the purpose of the FPS to the head of the marz (marzpet). Each marzpet was asked to appoint a staff member to assist the sample verification team. After sample verification was completed, the fieldwork coordinators contacted village mayors and made appointments to organize interviews with the selected farmers.

    Interviews were conducted at a local government or state building on a specified day, in rooms that had been prepared for the FPS. The field coordinators organized follow-ups with any selected farmers who were absent. The average time taken to complete an interview for FPS3 was 24 minutes.

    Data processing

    Data Editing

    After interviewers completed each questionnaire, the interviewers reviewed the questionnaire entries and submitted them to the field coordinator for cross-editing. During data entry in SPSS, mistakes were corrected using visual and program control. In the analysis phase, subsequent edits were made to logically impute data where appropriate.

    Data appraisal

    Estimates of Sampling Error

    Impacts of the WtM training program were estimated within a regression framework that controlled for baseline measures. Standard errors for the impact estimates were clustered at the village cluster level using Huber-White style "sandwich" estimators. Standard errors for key impact estimates are provided in Appendix B of the Water-to-Market Evaluation report, which is provided as a resource document.

    Access policy

    Location of Data Collection

    Millennium Challenge Corporation

    Archive where study is originally stored

    Millennium Challenge Corporation
    http://data.mcc.gov/evaluations/index.php/catalog/56
    Cost: None

    Data Access

    Confidentiality
    Is signing of a confidentiality declaration required?
    no
    Citation requirements

    Millennium Challenge Corporation, Farming Practices Survey 2006-07 (FPS1) and Farming Practices Survey 2010-11 (FPS3), Version 2.0 of the public use dataset (August 2012). www.mcc.gov

    Contacts

    Contacts
    Name Email
    Monitoring & Evaluation Division of the Millennium Challenge Corporation impact-eval@mcc.gov

    Metadata production

    DDI Document ID

    DDI_ARM_2007_MCC-WMFT_v01_M

    Producers
    Name Role
    Mathematica Policy Research, Inc. Independent Evaluator & Survey Firm
    Date of Metadata Production

    2013-11-06

    Metadata version

    DDI Document version

    Version 1.3 (Nov 2013). This version uses an updated MCC metadata template.
    Version 2.0 (April 2015). Edited version based on Version 01 (DDI-MCC-ARM-MPR-FPS-2006-v1.3) that was done by Millennium Challenge Corporation.

    Back to Catalog
    IHSN Survey Catalog

    © IHSN Survey Catalog, All Rights Reserved.