1932
0
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Annual Review of Resource Economics
  4. Volume 11, 2019
  5. Article

Annual Review of Resource Economics

Volume 11, 2019

Economics of Farm Input Subsidies in Africa

Abstract

Fertilizer and other input subsidies have been prominent components of agricultural policies in many Asian and African countries since the 1960s. Their economic and political rationale is scrutinized with emphasis on the second generation of targeted input subsidy programs that were scaled up in Sub-Saharan Africa after 2005. The extent to which they fulfill the goal of being market smart is assessed after inspecting the potential for such subsidies in Sub-Saharan Africa. The new fertilizer subsidy programs do not live up to the market-smart principles and suffer from severe design and implementation failures. While a clear exit strategy was one of the key principles, this has been neglected, with the result that most current programs are more sticky than smart. They have only partially achieved the intended impacts and have resulted in a number of unintended negative impacts. Subsidy program redesign should start from a pilot stage testing basic mechanisms.

Keyword(s): elite capture, externality, fertilizer subsidy, impact, JEL Q12, JEL Q18, JEL Q28, market failure, market smart
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-resource-100518-094002
2019-10-05
2024-04-23
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/resource/11/1/annurev-resource-100518-094002.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-resource-100518-094002&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. AGRA (Alliance Green Revolut. Afr.) 2017. A review of Malawi's Farm Input Subsidy Program (FISP). Lessons learned and benchmarking to ISP best practices Paper presented to Malawi Minist. Agric., Irrig Water Dev., Minist. Financ Aug. 25 Lilongwe:
  2. Ali DA, Deininger K, Goldstein M 2014. Environmental and gender impacts of land tenure regularization in Africa: pilot evidence from Rwanda. J. Dev. Econ. 110:262–75
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Arrow KJ. 1969. The organization of economic activity: issues pertinent to the choice of market versus nonmarket allocation. Anal. Eval. Public Expend. 1:59–73
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Arslan A, McCarthy N, Lipper L, Asfaw S, Cattaneo A, Kokwe M 2015. Climate smart agriculture? Assessing the adaptation implications in Zambia. J. Agric. Econ. 66:753–80
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Banful AB. 2009. Operational details of the 2008 fertilizer subsidy in Ghana—preliminary report GSSP Backgr. Pap. 18, Int Food Policy Res. Inst Washington, DC: http://gssp.ifpri.info/files/2010/06/banful-fertilizer-2-operational-details-june2.pdf
  6. Banful AB, Olayide O. 2010. Perspectives of selected stakeholder groups in Nigeria on the federal and state fertilizer subsidy programs NSSP Backgr. Pap. 8, Int. Food Policy Res. Inst Washington, DC: http://nssp.ifpri.info/files/2010/11/nssp-report-8-final.pdf
  7. Bator FM. 1958. The anatomy of market failure. Q. J. Econ. 72:351–79
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Baumol WJ, Oates WE. 1975. The Theory of Environmental Policy Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall
  9. Bhargava AK, Vagen T, Gassner A 2018. Breaking ground: unearthing the potential of high-resolution, remote-sensing soil data in understanding agricultural profits and technology use in Sub-Saharan Africa. World Dev 105:352–66
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Binswanger HP. 1981. Attitudes toward risk: theoretical implications of an experiment in rural India. Econ. J. 91:867–90
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Binswanger HP, Rosenzweig MR. 1986. Behavioural and material determinants of production relations in agriculture. J. Dev. Stud. 22:503–39
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Binswanger HP, Sillers DA. 1983. Risk aversion and credit constraints in farmers’ decision‐making: a reinterpretation. J. Dev. Stud. 20:5–21
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Burke WJ, Jayne T, Black JR 2017. Factors explaining the low and variable profitability of fertilizer application to maize in Zambia. Agric. Econ. 48:115–26
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Carter MR, Barrett CB. 2006. The economics of poverty traps and persistent poverty: an asset-based approach. J. Dev. Stud. 42:178–99
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Chamberlin J, Jayne TS, Headey D 2014. Scarcity amidst abundance? Reassessing the potential for cropland expansion in Africa. Food Policy 48:51–65
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Chirwa E, Dorward A. 2013. Agricultural Input Subsidies: The Recent Malawi Experience Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
  17. Crawford EW, Jayne TS, Kelly VA 2006. Alternative approaches for promoting fertilizer use in Africa Discuss. Pap. 23, Agric. Rural Dev. Dep., World Bank Washington, DC:
  18. Deininger K, Ali DA, Holden S, Zevenbergen J 2008. Rural land certification in Ethiopia: process, initial impact, and implications for other African countries. World Dev 36:1786–1812
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Denning G, Kabambe P, Sanchez P, Malik A, Flor R et al. 2009. Input subsidies to improve smallholder maize productivity in Malawi: toward an African Green Revolution. PLOS Biol 7:e1000023
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Devereux S. 1997. Household food security in Malawi Discuss. Pap., Inst. Dev. Stud., University of Sussex Sussex, UK:
  21. Dorward A, Chirwa E. 2011. The Malawi agricultural input subsidy programme: 2005/06 to 2008/09. Int. J. Agric. Sustain. 9:232–47
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Dorward A, Chirwa E. 2015. Crowding out, diversion, and benefit/cost assessments in fertilizer subsidy programs in sub‐Saharan Africa: a comment on Jayne, TS, Mather D, Mason N, Ricker‐Gilbert J, 2013. How do fertilizer subsidy programs affect total fertilizer use in sub‐Saharan Africa? Crowding out, diversion, and benefit/cost assessments. Agric. Econ 44:6687–703 Agric. Econ. 46(6):739–44
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Druilhe Z, Barreiro-Hurlé J. 2012. Fertilizer subsidies in sub-Saharan Africa ESA Work. Pap. 12-04, FAO Rome:
  24. Duflo E, Kremer M, Robinson J 2011. Nudging farmers to use fertilizer: theory and experimental evidence from Kenya. Am. Econ. Rev. 101:2350–90
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Fan S, Gulati A, Thorat S 2008. Investment, subsidies, and pro‐poor growth in rural India. Agric. Econ. 39:163–70
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Fisher M, Holden ST, Thierfelder C, Katengeza SP 2018. Awareness and adoption of conservation agriculture in Malawi: What difference can farmer-to-farmer extension make. Int. J. Agric. Sustain. 16:310–25
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Gautam M. 2015. Agricultural subsidies: resurging interest in a perennial debate. Indian J. Agric. Econ. 70:83–105
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Gautam M, Kar A. 2014. Public Expenditure Priorities for Competitiveness: Farm Level Evidence on the Effectiveness of Subsidies in Sri Lanka Washington, DC: World Bank
  29. Giller KE, Andersson JA, Corbeels M, Kirkegaard J, Mortensen D et al. 2015. Beyond conservation agriculture. Front. Plant Sci. 6:870
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Giller KE, Witter E, Corbeels M, Tittonell P 2009. Conservation agriculture and smallholder farming in Africa: the heretics’ view. Field Crops Res 114:23–34
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Gollin D, Udry C. 2017. Heterogeneity, measurement error, and misallocation: evidence from African agriculture Work. Pap., Dep. Int. Dev Oxford Univ., UK:
  32. Greenwald BC, Stiglitz JE. 1986. Externalities in economies with imperfect information and incomplete markets. Q. J. Econ. 101:229–64
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Harrigan J. 2008. Food insecurity, poverty and the Malawian Starter Pack: Fresh start or false start. Food Policy 33:237–49
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Haynes RJ, Mokolobate MS. 2001. Amelioration of Al toxicity and P deficiency in acid soils by additions of organic residues: a critical review of the phenomenon and the mechanisms involved. Nutrient Cycl. Agroecosyst. 59:47–63
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Hazell PB. 2010. The Asian green revolution. Proven Successes in Agricultural Development DJ Spielman, R Pandya-Lorch 67–98 Washington, DC: IFPRI
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Hemming DJ, Chirwa EW, Dorward A, Ruffhead HJ, Hill R et al. 2018. Agricultural input subsidies for improving productivity, farm income, consumer welfare and wider growth in low- and lower-middle-income countries: a systematic review. Campbell Syst. Rev. 4:1–153
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Hobbs PR, Sayre K, Gupta R 2008. The role of conservation agriculture in sustainable agriculture. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 363:543–55
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Holden ST. 1991. Peasants and sustainable development: the Chitemene region of Zambia PhD Thesis, Agric. Univ. Nor., Ås
  39. Holden ST. 1993. Peasant household modelling: farming systems evolution and sustainability in northern Zambia. Agric. Econ. 9:241–67
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Holden ST. 1997. Adjustment policies, peasant household resource allocation and deforestation in Northern Zambia: an overview and some policy conclusions. Forum Dev. Stud. 24:117–34
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Holden ST. 2001. A century of technological change and deforestation in the Miombo woodlands of northern Zambia. Agricultural Technologies and Tropical Deforestation A Angelsen, D Kaimowitz 251–69 New York: CABI
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Holden ST, Barrett CB, Hagos F 2006. Food-for-work for poverty reduction and the promotion of sustainable land use: can it work. Environ. Dev. Econ. 11:115–38
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Holden ST, Binswanger HP. 1998. Small-farmer decisionmaking, market imperfections, and natural resource management in developing countries. Agriculture and the Environment: Perspectives on Sustainable Rural Development E Lutz 50–71 Washington, DC: World Bank
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Holden ST, Fisher M. 2015. Subsidies promote use of drought tolerant maize varieties despite variable yield performance under smallholder environments in Malawi. Food Secur 7:1225–38
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Holden ST, Fisher M, Katengeza S, Thierfelder C 2018. Can lead farmers reveal the adoption potential of conservation agriculture? The case of Malawi. Land Use Policy 76:113–23
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Holden ST, Lunduka R. 2010. Too poor to be efficient? Impacts of the targeted fertilizer subsidy program in Malawi on farm plot level input use, crop choice and land productivity Noragric Rep. 55, Nor. Univ. Life Sci., Ås
  47. Holden ST, Lunduka R. 2012. Do fertilizer subsidies crowd out organic manures? The case of Malawi. Agric. Econ. 43:303–14
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Holden ST, Lunduka RW. 2013. Who benefit from Malawi's targeted farm input subsidy program. Forum Dev. Stud. 40:1–25
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Holden ST, Lunduka RW. 2014. Input subsidies, cash constraints, and timing of input supply. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 96:290–307
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Holden ST, Quiggin J. 2017a. Bounded awareness and anomalies in intertemporal choice: Zooming in Google Earth as both metaphor and model. J. Risk Uncertainty 54:15–35
     [Google Scholar]
  51. Holden ST, Quiggin J. 2017b. Climate risk and state-contingent technology adoption: shocks, drought tolerance and preferences. Eur. Rev. Agric. Econ. 44:285–308
     [Google Scholar]
  52. Holden ST, Quiggin J. 2018. Probability weighting and input use intensity in a state-contingent framework Paper presented at the 30th International Conference of Agricultural Economists Vancouver, Can:.
  53. Holden S, Shiferaw B, Pender J 2001. Market imperfections and land productivity in the Ethiopian highlands. J. Agric. Econ. 52:53–70
     [Google Scholar]
  54. Holden ST, Shiferaw BA, Pender J 2005. Policy analysis for sustainable land management and food security in Ethiopia: a bioeconomic model with market imperfections Res. Rep. 140, Int. Food Policy Res. Inst Washington, DC:
  55. Holden ST, Shiferaw BA, Wik M 1998. Poverty, market imperfections and time preferences: Of relevance for environmental policy. Environ. Dev. Econ. 3:105–30
     [Google Scholar]
  56. Holden ST, Taylor JE, Hampton S 1999. Structural adjustment and market imperfections: a stylized village economy-wide model with non-separable farm households. Environ. Dev. Econ. 4:69–87
     [Google Scholar]
  57. Jayne TS, Mason NM, Burke WJ, Ariga J 2018. Taking stock of Africa's second-generation agricultural input subsidy programs. Food Policy 75:1–14
     [Google Scholar]
  58. Jayne TS, Mather D, Mason N, Ricker‐Gilbert J 2013. How do fertilizer subsidy programs affect total fertilizer use in sub‐Saharan Africa? Crowding out, diversion, and benefit/cost assessments. Agric. Econ. 44:687–703
     [Google Scholar]
  59. Jayne TS, Mather D, Mason NM, Ricker‐Gilbert J, Crawford EW 2015. Rejoinder to the comment by Andrew Dorward and Ephraim Chirwa on Jayne, TS, D. Mather, N. Mason, and J. Ricker‐Gilbert. 2013. How do fertilizer subsidy program affect total fertilizer use in sub‐Saharan Africa? Crowding out, diversion, and benefit/cost assessments. Agric. Econ 44:6687–703 Agric. Econ. 46(6):745–55
    [Google Scholar]
  60. Jayne TS, Rashid S. 2013. Input subsidy programs in sub‐Saharan Africa: a synthesis of recent evidence. Agric. Econ. 44:547–62
     [Google Scholar]
  61. Katengeza S, Holden ST, Fisher M 2019. Use of integrated soil fertility management technologies in Malawi: Impact of dry spells exposure. Ecol. Econ. 156:134–52
     [Google Scholar]
  62. Katengeza SP, Holden ST, Lunduka RW 2018. Adoption of drought tolerant maize varieties under rainfall stress in Malawi. J. Agric. Econ. 70:198–214
     [Google Scholar]
  63. Kilic T, Whitney E, Winters P 2014. Decentralised beneficiary targeting in large-scale development programmes: insights from the Malawi Farm Input Subsidy Programme. J. Afr. Econ. 24:26–56
     [Google Scholar]
  64. Koppmair S, Kassie M, Qaim M 2017. The influence of farm input subsidies on the adoption of natural resource management technologies. Aust. J. Agric. Resour. Econ. 61:539–56
     [Google Scholar]
  65. Koussoubé E, Nauges C. 2017. Returns to fertiliser use: Does it pay enough? Some new evidence from Sub-Saharan Africa. Eur. Rev. Agric. Econ. 44:183–210
     [Google Scholar]
  66. Krueger AO. 1991. The Political Economy of Agricultural Price Policy: Volume 5, A Synthesis of the Political Economy in Developing Countries Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Univ. Press
  67. Lal R. 1998. Soil erosion impact on agronomic productivity and environment quality. Crit. Rev. Plant Sci. 17:319–464
     [Google Scholar]
  68. Lal R. 2004. Soil carbon sequestration to mitigate climate change. Geoderma 123:1–22
     [Google Scholar]
  69. Lal R, Singh BR. 1998. Effects of soil degradation on crop productivity in East Africa. J. Sustain. Agric. 13:15–36
     [Google Scholar]
  70. Levy S 2005. Starter Packs: A Strategy to Fight Hunger in Developing Countries? Lessons from the Malawi Experience 1998–2003 Oxfordshire, UK: CABI
  71. Li Y, Zhang W, Ma L, Huang G, Oenema O, Zhang F, Dou Z 2013. An analysis of China's fertilizer policies: impacts on the industry, food security and the environment. J. Environ. Qual. 42:972–81
     [Google Scholar]
  72. Liu EM. 2013. Time to change what to sow: risk preferences and technology adoption decisions of cotton farmers in China. Rev. Econ. Stat. 95:1386–403
     [Google Scholar]
  73. Liu EM, Huang J. 2013. Risk preferences and pesticide use by cotton farmers in China. J. Dev. Econ. 103:202–15
     [Google Scholar]
  74. Liverpool‐Tasie LSO. 2014. Fertilizer subsidies and private market participation: the case of Kano State, Nigeria. Agric. Econ. 45:663–78
     [Google Scholar]
  75. Liverpool-Tasie LSO, Omonona BT, Sanou A, Ogunleye WO 2017. Is increasing inorganic fertilizer use for maize production in SSA a profitable proposition? Evidence from Nigeria. Food Policy 67:41–51
     [Google Scholar]
  76. Liverpool‐Tasie LSO, Takeshima H. 2013. Input promotion within a complex subsector: fertilizer in Nigeria. Agric. Econ. 44:581–94
     [Google Scholar]
  77. Lunduka R, Ricker‐Gilbert J, Fisher M 2013. What are the farm‐level impacts of Malawi's farm input subsidy program? A critical review. Agric. Econ. 44:563–79
     [Google Scholar]
  78. Marenya PP, Barrett CB. 2009. State-conditional fertilizer yield response on western Kenyan farms. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 91:991–1006
     [Google Scholar]
  79. Marshall A. 1920 (1890). Principles of Economics London: Macmillan. , 8th ed..
  80. Mason NM, Jayne TS. 2013. Fertiliser subsidies and smallholder commercial fertiliser purchases: crowding out, leakage and policy implications for Zambia. J. Agric. Econ. 64:558–82
     [Google Scholar]
  81. Michael A, Tashikalma AK, Maurice DC 2018. Agricultural inputs subsidy in Nigeria: an overview of the Growth Enhancement Support Scheme (GESS). Acta Univ. Agric. Silvic. Mendel. Brun. 66:781–89
     [Google Scholar]
  82. Minten B, Koru B, Stifel D 2013. The last mile(s) in modern input distribution: pricing, profitability, and adoption. Agric. Econ. 44:629–46
     [Google Scholar]
  83. Morris M, Kelly VA, Kopicki RJ, Byerlee D 2007. Fertilizer Use in African Agriculture: Lessons Learned and Good Practice Guidelines. Washington, DC: World Bank.
  84. Mukasa AN. 2018. Technology adoption and risk exposure among smallholder farmers: panel data evidence from Tanzania and Uganda. World Dev 105:299–309
     [Google Scholar]
  85. Øygard R. 1987. Economic aspects of agricultural liming in Zambia PhD Thesis, Agric. Univ. Nor., Ås
  86. Pan L, Christiaensen L. 2012. Who is vouching for the input voucher? Decentralized targeting and elite capture in Tanzania. World Dev 40:1619–33
     [Google Scholar]
  87. Pandey S, León LAN, Friesen DK, Waddington SR 2007. Breeding maize for tolerance to soil acidity. Plant Breed. Rev. 28:59–100
     [Google Scholar]
  88. Papandreou AA. 1998. Externality and Institutions Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
  89. Pigou AC. 1924. The Economics of Welfare London: Macmillan. , 2nd ed..
  90. Rabin M. 2013. Risk aversion and expected-utility theory: a calibration theorem. Handbook of the Fundamentals of Financial Decision Making. Part I LC MacLean, WT Ziemba 241–52 Hackensack, NJ: World Sci.
     [Google Scholar]
  91. Ravallion M. 2009. Evaluation in the practice of development. World Bank Res. Obs. 24:29–53
     [Google Scholar]
  92. Ricker-Gilbert J, Jayne TS, Chirwa E 2011. Subsidies and crowding out: a double-hurdle model of fertilizer demand in Malawi. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 93:26–42
     [Google Scholar]
  93. Ricker-Gilbert J, Jayne T, Shively G 2013a. Addressing the “wicked problem” of input subsidy programs in Africa. Appl. Econ. Perspect. Policy 35:322–40
     [Google Scholar]
  94. Ricker‐Gilbert J, Mason NM, Darko FA, Tembo ST 2013b. What are the effects of input subsidy programs on maize prices? Evidence from Malawi and Zambia. Agric. Econ. 44:671–86
     [Google Scholar]
  95. Ruttan VW, Hayami Y. 1984. Toward a theory of induced institutional innovation. J. Dev. Stud. 20:203–23
     [Google Scholar]
  96. Sachs J. 2005. The End of Poverty: How We Can Make It Happen in Our Lifetime New York: Penguin
  97. Sanchez PA, Denning GL, Nziguheba G 2009. The African green revolution moves forward. Food Secur 1:37–44
     [Google Scholar]
  98. Sanchez PA, Palm C, Sachs J, Denning G, Flor R et al. 2007. The African millennium villages. PNAS 104:16775–80
     [Google Scholar]
  99. Sanchez PA, Salinas JG. 1981. Low-input technology for managing Oxisols and Ultisols in tropical America. Adv. Agron. 34:279–406
     [Google Scholar]
  100. Sandmo A. 1971. On the theory of the competitive firm under price uncertainty. Am. Econ. Rev. 61:65–73
     [Google Scholar]
  101. Sheahan M, Barrett CB. 2017. Ten striking facts about agricultural input use in Sub-Saharan Africa. Food Policy 67:12–25
     [Google Scholar]
  102. Sheahan M, Black R, Jayne TS 2013. Are Kenyan farmers under-utilizing fertilizer? Implications for input intensification strategies and research. Food Policy 41:39–52
     [Google Scholar]
  103. Shiferaw B, Holden ST. 1998. Resource degradation and adoption of land conservation technologies in the Ethiopian highlands: a case study in Andit Tid, North Shewa. Agric. Econ. 18:233–47
     [Google Scholar]
  104. Shiferaw B, Holden ST. 1999. Soil erosion and smallholders’ conservation decisions in the highlands of Ethiopia. World Dev 27:739–52
     [Google Scholar]
  105. Shiferaw B, Holden ST. 2000. Policy instruments for sustainable land management: the case of highland smallholders in Ethiopia. Agric. Econ. 22:217–32
     [Google Scholar]
  106. Singh BR, Goma HC, Lal R, Stewart BA 1995. Long-term soil fertility management experiments in Eastern Africa. Soil Management: Experimental Basis for Sustainability and Environmental Quality R Lal, BA Stewart 347–79 Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press
     [Google Scholar]
  107. Stoorvogel JJ, Smaling EMA. 1990. Assessment of soil nutrient depletion in Sub-Saharan Africa: 1983–2000. Vol. 2: Nutrient balances per crop and per land use systems Rep. 28, Winand Staring Cent., Wageningen, Neth .
  108. Suri T. 2011. Selection and comparative advantage in technology adoption. Econometrica 79:159–209
     [Google Scholar]
  109. Takeshima H, Nkonya E. 2014. Government fertilizer subsidy and commercial sector fertilizer demand: Evidence from the Federal Market Stabilization Program (FMSP) in Nigeria. Food Policy 47:1–12
     [Google Scholar]
  110. Tanaka T, Camerer CF, Nguyen Q 2010. Risk and time preferences: linking experimental and household survey data from Vietnam. Am. Econ. Rev. 100:557–71
     [Google Scholar]
  111. Tilman D, Balzer C, Hill J, Befort BL 2011. Global food demand and the sustainable intensification of agriculture. PNAS 108:20260–64
     [Google Scholar]
  112. Tilman D, Cassman KG, Matson PA, Naylor R, Polasky S 2002. Agricultural sustainability and intensive production practices. Nature 418:671–77
     [Google Scholar]
  113. Vanlauwe B, Bationo A, Chianu J, Giller KE, Merckx R et al. 2010. Integrated soil fertility management: operational definition and consequences for implementation and dissemination. Outlook Agric 39:17–24
     [Google Scholar]
  114. Vanlauwe B, Descheemaeker K, Giller KE, Huising J, Merckx R et al. 2015. Integrated soil fertility management in sub-Saharan Africa: unravelling local adaptation. Soil 1:491–508
     [Google Scholar]
  115. Vanlauwe B, Giller KE. 2006. Popular myths around soil fertility management in sub-Saharan Africa. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 116:34–46
     [Google Scholar]
  116. Vanlauwe B, Wendt J, Giller KE, Corbeels M, Gerard B, Nolte C 2014. A fourth principle is required to define conservation agriculture in sub-Saharan Africa: the appropriate use of fertilizer to enhance crop productivity. Field Crops Res 155:10–13
     [Google Scholar]
  117. Vieider FM, Beyene A, Bluffstone R, Dissanayake S, Gebreegziabher Z et al. 2018. Measuring risk preferences in rural Ethiopia. Econ. Dev. Cult. Change 66:417–46
     [Google Scholar]
  118. Wang D, Xu Z, Zhao J, Wang Y, Yu Z 2011. Excessive nitrogen application decreases grain yield and increases nitrogen loss in a wheat-soil system. Acta Agric. Scand. B Soil Plant Sci. 61:681–92
     [Google Scholar]
  119. Weerahewa J, Kodithuwakku SS, Ariyawardana A 2010. The fertilizer subsidy program in Sri Lanka. Food Policy for Developing Countries: Case Studies P Pinstrup-Andersen, F Cheng 1–12 Ithaca, NY: Cornell Univ. Press
     [Google Scholar]
  120. Wik M, Aragie Kebede T, Bergland O, Holden ST 2004. On the measurement of risk aversion from experimental data. Appl. Econ. 36:2443–51
     [Google Scholar]
  121. Woode PR. 1983. Changes in soil characteristics in a long term fertilizer trial with maize in northern Zambia Rep., Int. Dev. Prog., Agric. Univ. Nor., Ås
  122. World Bank 2007. Agriculture for Development: World Development Report 2008 Washington, DC: World Bank
  123. World Bank 2014. Republic of India: accelerating agricultural productivity growth Rep. 88093-IN, World Bank Washington, DC:
  124. Xu Z, Burke WJ, Jayne TS, Govereh J 2009. Do input subsidy programs “crowd in” or “crowd out” commercial market development? Modeling fertilizer demand in a two‐channel marketing system. Agric. Econ. 40:79–94
     [Google Scholar]
  125. Yesuf M, Bluffstone RA. 2009. Poverty, risk aversion, and path dependence in low-income countries: experimental evidence from Ethiopia. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 91:1022–37
     [Google Scholar]
  126. Zhang X, Davidson EA, Mauzerall DL, Searchinger TD, Dumas P, Shen Y 2015. Managing nitrogen for sustainable development. Nature 528:51–59
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-resource-100518-094002
Loading
Economics of Farm Input Subsidies in Africa
Annual Review of Resource Economics 11, 501 (2019); https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-resource-100518-094002
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-resource-100518-094002
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-resource-100518-094002
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Review Article

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error