The impact of smart input subsidy program on farm productivity: Evidence from Tanzania

被引:0
作者
Karata, Rehema [1 ]
机构
[1] Nagoya Univ, Dept Int Dev, Nagoya, Aichi 4648601, Japan
关键词
Input subsidy programs; Productivity; Staggered difference -in -difference; NAIVS; MALAWI; ECONOMY; DEMAND; GENDER; CROWD;
D O I
10.1016/j.sciaf.2024.e02181
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
Policymakers have a renewed interest in input subsidy programs in sub-Saharan Africa. However, the evidence of the program's impact is mixed. This paper uses the case of Tanzania's National Agricultural Input Voucher Scheme (NAIVS) to examine its effect on farm productivity. To account for the endogeneity problem arising from the non-random targeting of beneficiaries, this study employed a staggered difference-in-differences approach with a double robust estimator method on a three-wave panel survey. This approach is relevant because the treatment variable-NAIVS participation was gradually rolled out to households over multiple periods and groups. The results do not show evidence that the NAIVS program increased farm productivity. However, the group aggregate effects suggest that the group initially treated in 2010 experienced a positive and significant impact on maize production and income. This could indicate that during the early stages of the NAIVS program, extra effort was likely invested to ensure its effectiveness. Furthermore, the heterogeneous effect of farm size reveals that the NAIVS program increased the participation of beneficiary households with large-scale farms rather than small-scale farms. This suggests that the program did not effectively target resource-poor households. Finally, this paper calls for effective targeting and careful implementation of programs to improve farmer productivity.
引用
收藏
页数:11
相关论文
共 41 条
[1]   Agricultural productivity and deforestation: Evidence from input subsidies and ethnic favoritism in Malawi [J].
Abman, Ryan ;
Carney, Conor .
JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS AND MANAGEMENT, 2020, 103
[2]  
Andani Alhassan, 2020, Journal of Agricultural Extension and Rural Development, V12, P18, DOI 10.5897/JAERD2020.1138
[3]   The Farmer-Input Subsidy Program (FISP) Does not Service the Poor [J].
Andrews M. .
Development, 2021, 64 (3-4) :288-291
[4]   The Economy-wide Impacts and Risks of Malawi's Farm Input Subsidy Program [J].
Arndt, Channing ;
Pauw, Karl ;
Thurlow, James .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS, 2016, 98 (03) :962-980
[5]  
Baltzer Kenneth., 2011, Agriculture Input Subsidies in SSA.pdf
[6]   Exposure to agricultural technologies and adoption: The West Africa agricultural productivity program in Ghana, Senegal and Mali [J].
Bambio, Yiriyibin ;
Deb, Anurag ;
Kazianga, Harounan .
FOOD POLICY, 2022, 113
[7]   Old Problems in the New Solutions? Politically Motivated Allocation of Program Benefits and the "New" Fertilizer Subsidies [J].
Banful, Afua Branoah .
WORLD DEVELOPMENT, 2011, 39 (07) :1166-1176
[8]   Difference-in-Differences with multiple time periods [J].
Callaway, Brantly ;
Sant'Anna, Pedro H. C. .
JOURNAL OF ECONOMETRICS, 2021, 225 (02) :200-230
[9]   Impact of agricultural input subsidy policy on market participation and income distribution in Africa: A bottom-up/top-down approach [J].
Camara, Alhassane ;
Savard, Luc .
ECONOMIC MODELLING, 2023, 129
[10]   Subsidies and the African Green Revolution: Direct Effects and Social Network Spillovers of Randomized Input Subsidies in Mozambique [J].
Carter, Michael ;
Laajaj, Rachid ;
Yang, Dean .
AMERICAN ECONOMIC JOURNAL-APPLIED ECONOMICS, 2021, 13 (02) :206-229