IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/miffrp/303525.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Does Shifting to a Flexible E-Voucher Approach Improve Input Subsidy Program Outcomes? Quasi- Experimental Evidence from Zambia's Crop Forecast Surveys

Author

Listed:
  • Mason, Nicole M.
  • Kuteya, Auckland
  • Ngoma, Hambulo
  • Tossou, Dagbegnon A.
  • Baylis, Katharine R.

Abstract

The introduction of the e-voucher approach to Zambia’s input subsidy program, the Farmer Input Support Programme (FISP), was intended, inter alia, to improve farmers’ access to and use of modern inputs; incentivize private sector investment in fertilizer and other input value chains, thereby improving the timely availability of the inputs and bringing them closer to farmers; and encourage farmers to diversify away from maize by allowing them to use the e-voucher for the farm inputs or equipment of their choosing – not just maize seed and fertilizer. This study employs a difference- in-differences approach using Crop Forecast Survey (CFS) data from before and during the 2015/16 and 2016/17 e-FISP pilot years to empirically estimate the contemporaneous effects of the shift to the e-FISP from the traditional FISP on several of these outcomes. The results suggest that the e- FISP fell short of achieving many of its objectives, at least in the short-run and based on the outcomes that could be analyzed using the CFS data. At best, the outcomes analyzed were no different (in a statistically significant way) under the e-FISP and the traditional FISP; at worst, outcomes were worse under the e-FISP. These disappointing e-FISP results are likely due more to implementation challenges and lack of political will than to fundamental flaws in the e-FISP concept and design.

Suggested Citation

  • Mason, Nicole M. & Kuteya, Auckland & Ngoma, Hambulo & Tossou, Dagbegnon A. & Baylis, Katharine R., 2020. "Does Shifting to a Flexible E-Voucher Approach Improve Input Subsidy Program Outcomes? Quasi- Experimental Evidence from Zambia's Crop Forecast Surveys," Feed the Future Innovation Lab for Food Security Policy Research Papers 303525, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics, Feed the Future Innovation Lab for Food Security (FSP).
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:miffrp:303525
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.303525
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/303525/files/RP_165ac.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.303525?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
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Gatti, Nicolas & Cecil, Michael & Baylis, Kathy & Estes, Lyndon & Blekking, Jordan & Heckelei, Thomas & Vergopolan, Noemi & Evans, Tom, 2023. "Is closing the agricultural yield gap a “risky” endeavor?," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 208(C).
    2. Bethuel Kinyanjui Kinuthia, 2020. "Agricultural input subsidy and farmers outcomes in Tanzania," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2020-149, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    3. Kwon, Daye & Myers, Robert J. & Mason, Nicole M., 2022. "How do input subsidy programs affect smallholder households’ dietary diversity? Evidence from Zambia," 2022 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Anaheim, California 322493, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.

    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:miffrp:303525. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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/damsuus.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.