IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/roaaec/308401.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is Increasing Input Use For Rice Production A Profitable Proposition In Tanzania?

Author

Listed:
  • RASHID, Furaha Ndakije

Abstract

Demand for food staples particularly rice has been increasing tremendously especially in Sub-Saharan Africa relative to supply attributed by a continued rise in population. The shortfall in supply is generally considered to be caused by low use of inputs particularly inorganic fertilizer and improved seed among others. Meanwhile, there is limited empirical evidence to support this notion. This paper aimed at estimating the profitability and yield response to inorganic fertilizer and improved rice seed using cross-section data collected from 256 smallholder rice farmers in Mbarali district -Tanzania. Data was analysed using treatment effect model while instrumental variable was used for robustness check. Results shows that inorganic fertilizer use in the study area is not low as generalized by previous studies. It was further revealed that increasing fertilizer and seed use by 1 kg leads to an increase in yield by 6.2 kgha-1 and 9.2 kgha-1 respectively. Furthermore, rice production is a profitable business though low marginal physical product and high fertilizer price significantly reduce the profitability of fertilizer use. Thus, reducing input costs through well-managed subsidy programs, timely accessibility of inputs coupled with irrigation facilities and good agronomic practices are crucial for sustainable and profitable agricultural development.

Suggested Citation

  • RASHID, Furaha Ndakije, 2020. "Is Increasing Input Use For Rice Production A Profitable Proposition In Tanzania?," Review of Agricultural and Applied Economics (RAAE), Faculty of Economics and Management, Slovak Agricultural University in Nitra, vol. 23(2), October.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:roaaec:308401
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.308401
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/308401/files/RAAE_2_2020_Rashid.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.308401?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yu Sheng & Jiping Ding & Jikun Huang, 2019. "The Relationship between Farm Size and Productivity in Agriculture: Evidence from Maize Production in Northern China," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 101(3), pages 790-806.
    2. Ayala Wineman & Thomas S Jayne, 2018. "Land Prices Heading Skyward? An Analysis of Farmland Values across Tanzania," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 40(2), pages 187-214.
    3. Derek Byerlee & Klaus Deininger, 2013. "The Rise of Large Farms in Land-Abundant Countries: Do They Have a Future?," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Stein T. Holden & Keijiro Otsuka & Klaus Deininger (ed.), Land Tenure Reform in Asia and Africa, chapter 14, pages 333-353, Palgrave Macmillan.
    4. Bai, Jushan & Ng, Serena, 2010. "Instrumental Variable Estimation In A Data Rich Environment," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 26(6), pages 1577-1606, December.
    5. Sheahan, Megan & Barrett, Christopher B., 2017. "Ten striking facts about agricultural input use in Sub-Saharan Africa," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 12-25.
    6. Sheng, Yu & Chancellor, Will, 2019. "Exploring the relationship between farm size and productivity: Evidence from the Australian grains industry," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 196-204.
    7. Douglas Staiger & James H. Stock, 1997. "Instrumental Variables Regression with Weak Instruments," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 65(3), pages 557-586, May.
    8. Klaus Deininger & Songqing Jin & Yanyan Liu & Sudhir K. Singh, 2018. "Can Labor-Market Imperfections Explain Changes in the Inverse Farm Size–Productivity Relationship? Longitudinal Evidence from Rural India," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 94(2), pages 239-258.
    9. Donald F. Larson & Keijiro Otsuka & Tomoya Matsumoto & Talip Kilic, 2014. "Should African rural development strategies depend on smallholder farms? An exploration of the inverse-productivity hypothesis," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 45(3), pages 355-367, May.
    10. Liverpool-Tasie, Lenis Saweda O. & Omonona, Bolarin T. & Sanou, Awa & Ogunleye, Wale O., 2017. "Is increasing inorganic fertilizer use for maize production in SSA a profitable proposition? Evidence from Nigeria," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 41-51.
    11. Calogero Carletto & Sydney Gourlay & Paul Winters, 2015. "Editor's choice From Guesstimates to GPStimates: Land Area Measurement and Implications for Agricultural Analysis," Journal of African Economies, Centre for the Study of African Economies, vol. 24(5), pages 593-628.
    12. Mather, David & Minde, Isaac & Waized, Betty & Ndyetabula, Daniel & Temu, Anna, 2016. "The profitability of inorganic fertilizer use in smallholder maize production in Tanzania: Implications for alternative strategies to improve smallholder maize productivity," Food Security Collaborative Working Papers 245891, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    13. NdaNmadu, Job & Marcus, Philemon Lekwot, 2013. "Efficiency Of Ginger Production In Selected Local Government Areas Of Kaduna State, Nigeria," International Journal of Food and Agricultural Economics (IJFAEC), Alanya Alaaddin Keykubat University, Department of Economics and Finance, vol. 1(2), pages 1-14, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Thottappilly, Anna, 2021. "Identifying the Income Effect on Nutrition for Agricultural Households: Separability of Production and Consumption," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315335, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. Lowder, Sarah K. & Sánchez, Marco V. & Bertini, Raffaele, 2021. "Which farms feed the world and has farmland become more concentrated?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 142(C).
    3. Ayala Wineman & Thomas S. Jayne, 2021. "Factor Market Activity and the Inverse Farm Size-Productivity Relationship in Tanzania," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 57(3), pages 443-464, March.
    4. Ateka, Josiah & Onono-Okelo, Perez Ayieko & Etyang, Martin, 2021. "Does the inverse farm size productivity hypothesis hold for perennial monocrop systems in developing countries? Evidence from Kenya," African Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, African Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 16(3), September.
    5. C. S. C. Sekhar & Namrata Thapa, 2023. "Rural market imperfections in India: Revisiting old debates with new evidence," Development Policy Review, Overseas Development Institute, vol. 41(5), September.
    6. Chiarella, Cristina & Meyfroidt, Patrick & Abeygunawardane, Dilini & Conforti, Piero, 2023. "Balancing the trade-offs between land productivity, labor productivity and labor intensity," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 52(10), pages 1618-1634.
    7. Meilin Ma & Richard J. Sexton, 2021. "Modern agricultural value chains and the future of smallholder farming systems," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 52(4), pages 591-606, July.
    8. Meilin Ma & Jessie Lin & Richard J. Sexton, 2022. "The Transition from Small to Large Farms in Developing Economies: A Welfare Analysis," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 104(1), pages 111-133, January.
    9. Kibrom A. Abay & Lina Abdelfattah & Hoda El‐Enbaby & Mai Mahmoud & Clemens Breisinger, 2022. "Plot size and sustainable input intensification in smallholder irrigated agriculture: Evidence from Egypt," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 53(5), pages 792-810, September.
    10. Lin, Wensheng & Huang, Jikun, 2021. "Impacts of agricultural incentive policies on land rental prices: New evidence from China," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    11. Keijiro Otsuka, 2021. "Changing Relationship between Farm Size and Productivity and Its Implications for Philippine Agriculture," Discussion Papers 2102, Graduate School of Economics, Kobe University.
    12. Omotilewa, Oluwatoba J. & Jayne, T.S. & Muyanga, Milu & Aromolaran, Adebayo B. & Liverpool-Tasie, Lenis Saweda O. & Awokuse, Titus, 2021. "A revisit of farm size and productivity: Empirical evidence from a wide range of farm sizes in Nigeria," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 146(C).
    13. Ayala Wineman & Thomas S. Jayne & Emma Isinika Modamba & Holger Kray, 2020. "The changing face of agriculture in Tanzania: Indicators of transformation," Development Policy Review, Overseas Development Institute, vol. 38(6), pages 685-709, November.
    14. Kibrom A. Abay, 2020. "Measurement errors in agricultural data and their implications on marginal returns to modern agricultural inputs," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 51(3), pages 323-341, May.
    15. Hailemariam Ayalew & Jordan Chamberlin & Carol Newman & Kibrom A. Abay & Frederic Kosmowski & Tesfaye Sida, 2024. "Revisiting the size–productivity relationship with imperfect measures of production and plot size," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 106(2), pages 595-619, March.
    16. Rada, Nicholas E. & Fuglie, Keith O., 2019. "New perspectives on farm size and productivity," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 147-152.
    17. Karolina Pawlak & Walenty Poczta, 2020. "Agricultural Resources and their Productivity: A Transatlantic Perspective," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(Special 1), pages 18-49.
    18. Carriero, Andrea & Kapetanios, George & Marcellino, Massilimiano, 2015. "A Shrinkage Instrumental Variable Estimator For Large Datasets," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 91(1-2), pages 67-87, Mars-Juin.
    19. Cecilia ALEXANDRI & Bianca PAUNA & Corina SAMAN, 2020. "The Relationship Between Total Factor Productivity and Subsidies in the Case of Romanian Farms," Journal for Economic Forecasting, Institute for Economic Forecasting, vol. 0(4), pages 85-98, December.
    20. Martey, Edward & Kuwornu, John K.M. & Adjebeng-Danquah, Joseph, 2019. "Estimating the effect of mineral fertilizer use on Land productivity and income: Evidence from Ghana," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 463-475.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:roaaec:308401. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/feuagsk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.