32 CHAPTER 3


some domains are highland moisture-reliable domains (1, 2, and 5), whereas the others are highland, drought-prone domains (12 and 15); some have high market access (1 and 2), whereas the others are more remote (5 and 12); most have medium population densities (2, 5, 12, and 15), but one is more densely populated (1). Accordingly, we further refine our sample by focusing on treatment and comparison kebeles falling within these five development domains.


To further check the sample’s validity, we present in Table 3.2 the dis- tribution of treatment and comparison kebeles across the administrative regions of Ethiopia. Indeed, as described in Chapter 2, regional coopera- tive offices can play an important role in the promotion and organization of cooperatives through directives passed down to woreda cooperative offices. Consequently, there are important differences at the regional level that need to be accounted for. As shown in Table 3.2, only three regions—Amhara, Oro- mia, and SNNP—exhibit a relatively balanced subsample between treatment and comparison kebeles. In contrast, the Tigray subsample contains only one kebele without a cooperative in 2005, and the subsamples in Beneshangul- Gumuz and Harari have a total membership of one kebele each. Hence, it may be necessary to further limit the sample to include only the Amhara, Oromia, and SNNP regions to ensure better comparability of treatment and comparison observations.


Table 3.3 reports a series of balancing tests for both samples—one that includes all regions and one that excludes Tigray, Beneshangul-Gumuz, and Harari—to ascertain the significance of these comparability concerns. Results indicate that the sample containing all regions performs poorly: a significant difference between treatment and comparison kebeles is found in 5 of the 13 tests performed. By comparison, the sample restricted to Amhara, Oromia, and SNNP performs better: the kebeles are on average similar in all dimen- sions covered by these tests. We thus reject the suitability of the full sample and restrict ourselves to the subsample consisting of three regions that includes 35 treatment and 73 comparison kebeles.


Table 3.2 Number of treatment and comparison kebeles, by region Kebele


Beneshangul- category Tigray Amhara


Comparison 1 18 Treatment 14


9


Oromia Gumuz 33


20


1 0


SNNP 22


6


Harari 1


0


Total 76


49


Source: Authors’ calculations based on data from ESCS (2005). Notes: SNNP means Southern Nations, Nationalities, and Peoples regional state. A kebele is a peasant association, the smallest administrative unit in Ethiopia.


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103