| Literature DB >> 36014858 |
Muhammad Rizwan1, Azhar Abbas2, Hui Xu1, Umar Ijaz Ahmed3, Ping Qing4, Puming He1, Muhammad Amjed Iqbal2, Muhammad Aamir Shahzad4.
Abstract
A range of nutritional needs are met through the use of fortified farm-based foods. Wheat biorfortification with zinc is such an example where biorfortification is carried out for a crucial element like Zinc. Zinc-biofortified wheat (Zn-wheat) has been officially launched in Pakistan since 2016 but its wide-scale dissemination, adoption and consumption have not taken place till to date. On the other hand, essential nutrients deficiencies have wide-ranging implications for public health especially for children and lactating mothers. This study is undertaken to know the reasons for the slow progression of scaling up of biofortified wheat varieties in Pakistan, people's awareness about biofortified wheat and to recognize the role of information in acceptance and willingness to pay for this wheat. For this purpose, randomly selected 474 households were interviewed from four districts of Punjab province. They were categorized into four groups based on their exposure to information in real and hypothetical cheap talk (game theory context). Study findings reveal that respondents were ready to pay for fortified wheat if they are aware about nutrient aspects and Zn deficiency. Using Discrete Choice Experiment, the preferences for and factors affecting the willingness to pay for fortified wheat are evaluated. Main factors having positive impact include household head's education and income, having pregnant women and children <5 years age. It was also found that people having valid information about nutrients of a food would be willing to pay more. The study highlights need for policy focus on educating people about nutritional aspects as well as making available biofortified foods to promote healthy living.Entities:
Keywords: awareness; biorfortification; bivariate analysis; food security; zinc deficiency
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36014858 PMCID: PMC9413209 DOI: 10.3390/nu14163352
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutrients ISSN: 2072-6643 Impact factor: 6.706
Figure 1Countries with zinc deficiency (source harvest plus): available at https://bpi.harvestplus.org/subindex_micronutrients.html?id=c2 (accessed on 5 April 2022).
Figure 2Zinc-wheat priority level (source harvest plus): available at https://bpi.harvestplus.org/bpi_cropmaps.html?id=c8 (accessed on 28 March 2022).
Figure 3Conceptual model employed by the study.
Figure 4Map of Punjab province showing study districts.
Survey Design.
| Real | Without Cheap Talk—Hypothetical | With Cheap Talk—Hypothetical | |
|---|---|---|---|
| No information regarding Nutrition | 1 | -- | -- |
| Given information about Nutrition | 2 | 3 | 4 |
Distribution of respondents with respect to approaches and location.
| Area/Region | Districts | Not Given Information | With Given Information | Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Real | Real | Hypoth. without Cheap Talk | Hypoth. Cheap Talk | |||
| Rural | Khanewal | 31 | 29 | 30 | 28 | 118 |
| Muzaffargarh | 29 | 32 | 30 | 29 | 120 | |
| Urban | Multan | 32 | 27 | 32 | 30 | 121 |
| Rahimyar Khan | 30 | 30 | 28 | 27 | 115 | |
| Total | 122 | 118 | 120 | 114 | 474 | |
Summary Statistics of socioeconomic variables under each treatment.
| Used Variables | Descriptions of Variables | Full Sample | Not Given Information | With Given Information | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Real | Real | Hypoth. without Cheap Talk | Hypoth. with Cheap Talk | |||
|
| Respondent’ preference between varieties | |||||
| Conventional wheat | % of respondents who chose conventional wheat | 48.2 | 51.6 | 50.7 | 49.6 | 50.2 |
| biofortified wheat | % of respondents who chose zinc wheat | 52.8 | 49.4 | 49.3 | 51.4 | 49.8 |
|
| ||||||
| Gender | %age of male | 0.57 | 0.43 | 0.498 | 0.449 | 0.471 |
| Education | Schooling years | 7.287 | 6.241 | 7.957 | 7.124 | 6.987 |
| Family size | Number of family members | 6.213 | 5.789 | 6.137 | 6.241 | 6.021 |
| Children <5 yrs | Number of children under 5 years | 1.318 | 1.298 | 1.495 | 1.369 | 1.387 |
| Breastfeed/pregnant | Number of breast-feeding/pregnant women | 0.372 | 0.395 | 0.323 | 0.309 | 0.401 |
| Income | Household income per year-PKR | 279,000 | 253,612 | 312,420 | 251,024 | 302,180 |
| Prev. inform | %age of respondents who have information before experiment | 0.224 | 0.201 | 0.198 | 0.291 | 0.299 |
|
| ||||||
| KWL | Khanewal district | 118 | 31 | 29 | 30 | 28 |
| MNT | Multan district | 120 | 29 | 32 | 30 | 29 |
| RYK | Rahim Yar Khan district | 121 | 32 | 27 | 32 | 30 |
| DGK | Dera Ghazi Khan district | 115 | 30 | 30 | 28 | 27 |
Estimation of parameter—bivariate probit model.
| Full Sample | Not Given Information | With Given Information | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Real | Real | Hypoth. without Cheap Talk | Hypoth. with Cheap Talk | ||
| Specific constant of varieties | |||||
| Conventional wheat | 5.2134 | 9.2341 | 3.8476 | 3.7210 | 8.3649 |
| Zinc wheat | 4.3627 | 4.7261 | 5.1278 | 5.9742 | 6.2171 |
| Price effect regarding own | |||||
| Conventional wheat | −0.0425 | −0.3641 | −0.0571 | −0.0142 | −0.0312 |
| Zinc wheat | 0.0391 | −0.0092 | −0.0510 | −0.0049 | −0.0094 |
| Log-likelihood | −5431.43 | −892.61 | −925.96 | −1412.02 | −903.39 |
Willingness to pay (WTP) and Marginal Willingness to pay (MWTP) for conventional and Zinc wheat based on the bivariate probit model.
| Not Given Information | With Given Information | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Real | Real | Hypoth. without Cheap Talk | Hypoth. with Cheap Talk | |
| Total willingness to pay | ||||
| Conventional wheat | 90 | 90 | 90 | 90 |
| Zinc wheat | 95 | 105 | 115 | 108 |
| Marginal willingness to pay | ||||
| Zinc wheat vs. conventional | 5 (5%) | 15 (16%) | 25 (27%) | 18 (20%) |
A bivariate probit estimation of correlates of willingness to pay – information with real.
| Variety | ||
|---|---|---|
| Conventional Wheat | Biofortified Wheat | |
| Price of conventional wheat | −0.00421 ** (0.0012) | 0.00024 (0.0004) |
| Price of zinc wheat | 0.00024 (0.0035) | 0.00067 * (0.0002) |
| Gender | 0.00521 (0.4561) | 0.00211 * (0.1120) |
| Education | 0.08721 (0.0371) | 0.02371 ** (0.0312) |
| Family size | −0.04102 ** (0.0420) | −0.31207 (0.0517) |
| Children <5 yrs | 0.23866 (0.2356) | 0.34502 ** (0.0689) |
| Breast feed/ pregnant | 0.04213 (0.0412) | 0.76852 * (0. 3514) |
| Income | 0.00524 (0.1023) | 4.96584 * (0.0239) |
| Taste-preference | 0.51225 (0.0681) | 0.84534 (0.1354) |
| Prev. inform | −1.38916 (0.3816) | −0.82347 (0.0612) |
| KWL | −0.94263 (0.0681) | 0.57630 * (0.0325) |
| MNT | −0.74233 (0.0281) | 0.47031 * (0.1320) |
| RYK | −0.64063 (0.1681) | 0.07630 ** (0.2115) |
| DGK | −0.84001 (0.2981) | 0.43330 ** (0.0624) |
| Constant | 3.94528 * (0.2205) | 5.23404 *** (0.0952) |
| Log-likelihood | −869.21350 | |
Note: *, **, *** respectively stand for significant at 1%, 5% and 10% level of significance.