000			03201nab|a22003737a|4500
001			65420
003			MX-TxCIM
005			20220920151209.0
008			20221s2022||||mx |||p|op||||00||0|eng|d
022			_a1542-7528
022			_a1542-7536 (Online)
024	8		_ahttps://doi.org/10.1080/15427528.2022.2066041
040			_aMX-TxCIM
041			_aeng
100	1		_aPaudel, G.P. _8R1705561 _91353 _gSustainable Intensification Program
245	1	0	_aSustainable intensification under resource constraints : _bEstimating the heterogeneous effects of hybrid maize adoption in Nepal
260			_bTaylor and Francis Ltd., _c2022. _aUSA :
500			_aPeer review
500			_aReference only
520			_aManagerial practices for farming-system intensification have received increased focus in research-and-development (R&D) initiatives. These technologies are proven to close the yield gaps in researcher-managed field trials and are recommended for farmer’s adoption. However, not all farmers have the technical, financial, and social capital to adopt and benefit from these recommended technologies. Is the current level of productivity enhancement achieved by smallholder system intensification sufficient to sustain rural livelihoods? To this end, the study assessed the impacts of hybrid maize (Zea mays L.) adoption on productivity and livelihoods in the mid-hill region of Nepal. Smallholders in the study region face severe shortages of labor, improved cultivars, and inorganic fertilizers, resulting in very low yields and profitability. We find that maize hybrid adoption increased crop productivity by 109%, making the crop profitable for smallholders and enhancing the per capita food expenditure by 20%. Nevertheless, these benefits were unevenly distributed: relatively small farms (≤0.3 ha) achieved greater gains in productivity and livelihood per land unit from hybrid maize adoption, but only larger farms (>0.3 ha) enjoyed the aggregate livelihood benefits of the technology. System intensification gains economic relevance because of the severe scarcity of resources, whereas the resource scarcity itself determines the economic relevance of system intensification, presenting a paradox. Increasing market access to material inputs did not significantly alter the observed patterns. More studies are required on the relationship between farm size and the livelihood impacts of sustainable intensification to facilitate R&D targeting and ensure inclusive development.
546			_aText in English
650		7	_aHybrids _2AGROVOC _91151
650		7	_aMaize _2AGROVOC _91173
650		7	_aConstraints _2AGROVOC _96423
650		7	_aSmallholders _2AGROVOC _91763
650		7	_aSustainable intensification _2AGROVOC _91355
650		7	_aWelfare _2AGROVOC _92870
651		7	_2AGROVOC _93932 _aNepal
700	1		_aKrishna, V.V. _8INT2994 _gSocioeconomics Program _gSustainable Agrifood Systems _9558
700	1		_aRahut, D.B. _8INT3364 _9942 _gSocioeconomics Program
700	1		_aMcDonald, A. _8INT3034 _9883 _gSustainable Intensification Program
773	0		_tJournal of Crop Improvement _dUSA : Taylor and Francis Ltd., 2022 _x1542-7528 _gIn press _w94851
942			_cJA _n0 _2ddc
999			_c65420 _d65412