Welfare Impacts of Agricultural Technology‐Utilization Regimes Among Rice Farmers in the Anchor Borrowers' Program in Southwest Nigeria

ABSTRACT Agricultural development interventions increasingly promote multiple technologies, yet farmers may utilize them differently, with uncertain implications for welfare. This study assesses whether alternative agricultural technology‐utilization regimes generate similar outcomes among rice farmers benefiting from the Anchor Borrowers' Program (ABP) in Southwest Nigeria. Using cross‐sectional data from 345 ABP beneficiary rice farmers, we classify observed combinations of improved agronomic practices, improved seeds, inorganic fertilizers, and crop‐protection chemicals into four technology‐utilization regimes. A Multinomial Endogenous Treatment Effects model is employed to account for non‐random selection into regimes and estimate their effects on rice productivity, per‐capita consumption expenditure (PCE), and poverty‐likelihood. Relative to the agronomic‐practices–agrochemicals regime (reference regime), the improved‐seeds‐based regime significantly increases rice productivity by 4.5% and monthly PCE by approximately ₦5797; the fertilizers–crop‐protection regime also significantly increases productivity by 4.8%, but yields no significant improvement in broader welfare outcomes; the crop‐protection‐only regime is statistically indistinguishable from the reference regime across all outcomes. These findings suggest that technology‐regime composition rather than the numerical count matters for development outcomes. Policies that promote contextually apt technologies, strengthen complementary ancillary services, and improve farmers' capacity to transform productivity gains into broader welfare outcomes are likely to be more effective than undifferentiated technology‐promotion strategies.