Farm production diversity and its influence on diet quality in South Eastern Kenya

Figures & data

Figure 1. Agriculture-nutrition linkages at household level.

Source: Adapted from Ogutu, Fongar, et al. (2020).

Figure 2. Map of Kenya; and inset—Machakos (Mwala and Muthetheni wards) and Makueni Counties (Kathonzweni and muvua/kikumini wards).

Table 1. Food group classification for different dietary diversity scores.

#	Household dietary diversity score (HDDS)	Women’s dietary diversity score (WDDS)	Child dietary diversity score (CDDS)
1	Cereals	Starchy staples	Grains, roots, and tubers
2	White roots and tubers	Dark green leafy vegetables	Legumes and nuts
3	Vegetables	Other vitamin A rich fruits and vegetables	Dairy products (milk, yogurt, cheese)
4	Fruits	Other fruits and vegetables	Flesh foods (meat, fish, poultry, and liver/organ meat)
5	Meat	Organ meat	Eggs
6	Eggs	Meat and fish	Vitamin A rich fruits and vegetables
7	Fish	Eggs	Other fruits and vegetables
8	Legumes, nuts, and seeds	Legumes, nuts, and seeds
9	Milk	Milk and milk products
10	Oils and fat
11	Sugar and sweets
12	Spices, condiments, and beverages

Source: FAO (2010) and WHO (2008).

Table 2. Sample characteristics of farmers in Machakos and Makueni counties.

	Machakos (n = 416)	Makueni (n = 414)	Difference
Crop diversity (number)	5.19 (0.11)	5.81 (0.144)	−0.61*** (0.09)
Livestock diversity (number)	2.60 (0.04)	2.69 (0.04)	−0.10 (0.06)
Simpson index (score 0–1)	0.61 (0.01)	0.59 (0.01)	0.02** (0.01)
Food group production diversity (number 1–12)	6.29 (0.07)	6.53 (0.08)	−0.24** (0.11)
Food consumption score (number)	21.26 (0.31)	22.60 (0.29)	−1.34*** (0.42)
Household Diet Diversity Score (1–12)	7.24 (0.07)	7.44 (0.07)	−0.19 (0.10)
Women Diet Diversity Score (1–9)	4.96 (0.07)	5.30 (0.07)	−0.34*** (0.09)
Child Diet Diversity Score (1–7)	3.89 (0.09)	4.19 (0.09)	−0.29** (0.13)
Household head age (years)	52.97 (0.70)	50.63 (0.64)	2.34*** (0.95)
Household head formal education (years)	8.42 (0.17)	9.44 (0.16)	−1.01*** (0.23)
Wealth (‘000’ Kenya shillings)	824.90 (39.88)	988.99 (45.02)	−164.10*** (60.12)
Household size (number)	5.17 (0.09)	4.88 (0.08)	0.30*** (0.12)
Commercialization (ratio 0–1)	0.25 (0.01)	0.27 (0.01)	−0.13 (0.02)
Household head is male (yes = 1, no = 0)	0.70 (0.02)	0.73 (0.02)	−0.03 (0.03)

***, ** differences were significant at the 1 and 5% levels. Standard errors in parentheses.

Table 3. Poisson estimates of the association of farm production diversity and household dietary diversity.

Variable	Household Diet Diversity Score (HDDS)				Food Consumption Score (FCS)
	[1]	[2]	[3]	[4]	[5]	[6]	[7]	[8]
Crop diversity (number)	0.077*** (0.02)				0.411*** (0.06)
Livestock diversity (number)		0.234*** (0.06)				0.698*** (0.24)
Simpson index (score 0–1)			1.450*** (0.39)				6.742*** (1.50)
Food group production diversity (number)				0.157*** (0.03)				0.675*** (0.13)
County (Machakos = 1; Makueni = 0)	−0.072 (0.09)	−0.106 (0.09)	−0.151 (0.09)	−0.088 (0.09)	−0.550 (0.37)	−0.792** (0.37)	−0.972*** (0.37)	−0.689 (0.37)
Commercialization (ratio 0–1)	0.415** (0.21)	0.493** (0.21)	0.503** (0.21)	0.373 (0.21)	3.168*** (0.81)	3.513*** (0.83)	3.614*** (0.83)	3.043*** (0.83)
Child of 6–59 months present (yes = 1)	0.226*** (0.10)	0.222** (0.10)	0.212** (0.10)	0.234** (0.10)	0.702 (0.38)	0.702 (0.39)	0.643 (0.39)	0.746** (0.39)
Age of household head (years)	−0.001 (0.01)	0.000 (0.00)	0.001 (0.00)	−0.002 (0.00)	−0.041*** (0.01)	−0.034** (0.02)	−0.034** (0.01)	−0.044*** (0.02)
Education of household head (years)	0.006 (0.02)	0.004 (0.02)	0.003 (0.02)	0.003 (0.02)	0.104 (0.06)	0.087 (0.06)	0.083 (0.06)	0.085 (0.06)
Household is male (yes = 1; no = 0)	0.309*** (0.11)	0.294*** (0.01)	0.361*** (0.11)	0.306*** (0.11)	0.352 (0.43)	0.345 (0.44)	0.607 (0.44)	0.353 (0.43)
Wealth (ln of KES)	0.274*** (0.04)	0.264*** (0.04)	0.304*** (0.03)	0.257*** (0.04)	1.380*** (0.13)	1.424*** (0.13)	1.549*** (0.13)	1.343*** (0.13)
Sample size (n)	830	830	830	830	830	830	830	830
Wald Chi^2	147.34***	129.70***	131.83***	145.77***	314.87***	232.24***	270.25***	300.79***
McFadden Pseudo R^2	0.011	0.011	0.011	0.011	0.059	0.054	0.056	0.059

***, ** differences were significant at the 1 and 5% levels.

Table 4. Poisson maximum likelihood estimates of the association of farm production diversity and women diet diversity.

Variables	Women Diet Diversity Score (WDDS)
	[1]	[2]	[3]	[4]
Crop diversity (species count)	0.078*** (0.02)
Livestock diversity (species count)		0.184*** (0.06)
Simpson index (score 0–1)			0.855** (0.39)
Food group production diversity (number)				0.176*** (0.03)
County (Machakos = 1; Makueni = 0)	0.213** (0.09)	0.254*** (0.09)	0.284*** (0.09)	0.227*** (0.09)
Commercialization (ratio 0–1)	0.516*** (0.20)	0.587*** (0.20)	0.590*** (0.20)	0.464** (0.20)
Child of 6–59 months present (yes = 1)	0.096 (0.09)	0.094 (0.09)	0.089 (0.09)	0.106 (0.09)
Household head age (years)	−0.009** (0.00)	−0.008** (0.00)	−0.007 (0.00)	−0.010*** (0.00)
Household head formal education (years)	0.005 (0.01)	0.002 (0.01)	0.001 (0.01)	0.002 (0.01)
Wealth (ln of KES)	0.236*** (0.03)	0.236*** (0.03)	0.267*** (0.03)	0.215*** (0.03)
Household head is male (yes = 1; no = 0)	0.340*** (0.10)	0.332*** (0.10)	0.377*** (0.10)	0.335*** (0.10)
Sample size (n)	830	830	830	830
Wald Chi^2	146.80***	138.21***	128.84***	166.43***
McFadden Pseudo R^2	0.015	0.014	0.013	0.016

***, ** differences were significant at the 1 and 5% levels.

Table 5. Poisson maximum likelihood estimates of the association of farm production diversity and child diet diversity.

Variables	Child Diet Diversity Score (CDDS)
	[1]	[2]	[3]	[4]
Crop diversity (number)	0.099*** (0.02)
Livestock diversity (number)		0.118 (0.07)
Simpson index (score 0–1)			0.887 (0.56)
Food group production diversity (number)				0.119*** (0.04)
County (Machakos = 1; Makueni = 0)	−0.162 (0.12)	−0.197 (0.13)	−0.243 (0.13)	−0.183 (0.13)
Commercialization (ratio 0–1)	−0.137 (0.29)	−0.025 (0.29)	−0.067 (0.29)	−0.121 (0.30)
Age of household head (years)	0.006 (0.01)	0.005 (0.01)	0.006 (0.01)	0.006 (0.01)
Age of child’s caregiver (years)	−0.012 (0.01)	−0.009 (0.01)	−0.009 (0.01)	−0.012 (0.01)
Household head is male (yes = 1)	0.070 (0.15)	0.072 (0.15)	0.119 (0.15)	0.072 (0.15)
Formal education of household head (years)	−0.030 (0.02)	−0.041 (0.02)	−0.039 (0.03)	−0.041 (0.02)
Formal education of child’s caregiver (years)	0.048** (0.02)	0.049 (0.03)	0.046 (0.03)	0.052** (0.02)
Wealth (ln of KES)	0.213*** (0.05)	0.252*** (0.05)	0.274*** (0.05)	0.232*** (0.05)
Child’s age (months)	0.011*** (0.00)	0.010** (0.00)	0.010** (0.00)	0.010** (0.00)
Sample size (n)	345	345	345	345
Wald Chi^2	87.87***	56.16***	56.20***	66.16***
McFadden Pseudo R^2	0.018	0.015	0.016	0.016

***, ** differences were significant at the 1 and 5% levels.

Ogutu, S. O., Fongar, A., Gödecke, T., Jäckering, L., Mwololo, H. M., Njuguna, M., & Qaim, M. (2020). How to make farming and agricultural extension more nutrition-sensitive: Evidence from a randomized controlled trial in Kenya. European Review of Agricultural Economics, 47(1), 95–118.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

FAO (2010). Retrieved March 11, 2022, from https://www.fao.org/3/i1983e/i1983e00.pdf

 Google Scholar

WHO (2008). Retrieved March 11, 2022, from http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/43895/9789241596664_eng.pdf;jsessionid=73C7C471E331DC952FD99EC482740578?sequence=1

 Google Scholar

Data availability statement

Data is available from the authors on request.