Skip to main content

Table 6 Second step Heckman regression model results

From: The drivers and intensity of adoption of beekeeping in northwest Ethiopia

Explanatory variables

Coefficient

p value

Gender of the household head (male dummy)

0.019

0.944

Age of the household head in years

0.011

0.448

Marital status of the household head

− 0.056

0.893

Household size measured in number of persons in the family

0.075

0.238

Livestock holding in tropical livestock unit

0.137

< 0.001***

Educational status of the household head (Illiterate dummy)

0.924

0.106

Number of extension visits in a year

0.734

< 0.001***

Availability of accessories (Yes dummy)

0.156

0.574

Access to credit in the production season (Yes dummy)

0.960

0.011**

Whether the household has taken beekeeping training (Yes dummy)

− 0.308

0.445

Presence of honey bee pests (Yes dummy)

− 1.374

< 0.001***

Availability of bee feeds around the residence (Yes dummy)

− 0.462

0.354

Engagement in swarm catching practices (Yes dummy)

0.569

0.026**

Major economic activities (Beekeeping dummy)

3.966

< 0.001***

Household’s perception of better hives (Traditional hive dummy)

− 0.214

0.624

Distance to the nearest marketplace in km

− 0.005

0.871

Number of years the household stayed in the village/district

0.004

0.725

Location (Dangila dummy)

− 0.016

0.959

Constant

7.909

< 0.001***

Inverse Mill’s ratio (λ)

− 1.279

0.055*

Wald χ2 = 1190.3 Prob > χ2 < 0.001***

  1. *p < 0.1; **p < 0.05; ***p < 0.01 represent significance at 10%, 5% and 1% level of significance, respectively