IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fpr/ifprid/1812.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

What is the intrinsic value of fertilizer? Experimental value elicitation and decomposition in the hill and terai regions of Nepal

Author

Listed:
  • Ward, Patrick S.
  • Gupta, Shweta
  • Singh, Vartika
  • Ortega, David L.
  • Gautam, Shriniwas
  • Guerena, David
  • Shrestha, Rudra Bahadur

Abstract

The government in Nepal faces double burden of enhancing fertilizer application rates in the country by investing in efforts to boost demand and at the same time, managing its dependence on global markets to fulfill the supply of important nutrients such as Urea and DAP. Without an understanding of the true valuation of fertilizers for farmers, achieving this balance would be difficult. We use Becker-DeGroot-Marshak value elicitation methods to derive the intrinsic value that farmers in Nepal place on fertilizers. Eliciting values under three distinct procurement scenarios, we are able to decompose the total intrinsic value of fertilizer into a willingness-to-pay (WTP) to travel to procure fertilizer, a WTP for assured fertilizer supplies, and a WTP for the productivity benefits of fertilizer. Disaggregating our sample according to location (hills versus terai), we are able to estimate differences in total intrinsic value as well as value components along these geographical dimensions. While farmers in the hills are generally willing to pay more for urea than their counterparts in the terai, the total amount they are willing to pay is, on average, less than the market price for urea. We explore heterogeneity in valuations and discuss the implications of our findings on fertilizer procurement and distribution policies, as well as direct support policies that the Nepal government may consider. While support policiessuch as subsidies may encourage increased utilization of fertilizers, policies that lower barriers to private sector entry and increase the density of fertilizer retailers could also increase fertilizer utilization.

Suggested Citation

  • Ward, Patrick S. & Gupta, Shweta & Singh, Vartika & Ortega, David L. & Gautam, Shriniwas & Guerena, David & Shrestha, Rudra Bahadur, 2019. "What is the intrinsic value of fertilizer? Experimental value elicitation and decomposition in the hill and terai regions of Nepal," IFPRI discussion papers 1812, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
  • Handle: RePEc:fpr:ifprid:1812
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.ifpri.org/cdmref/p15738coll2/id/133150/filename/133361.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stein T. Holden & Rodney W. Lunduka, 2014. "Input Subsidies, Cash Constraints, and Timing of Input Supply," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 96(1), pages 290-307.
    2. Lybbert, Travis J., 2006. "Indian farmers' valuation of yield distributions: Will poor farmers value `pro-poor' seeds?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 415-441, October.
    3. Michael R. Carter & Rachid Laajaj & Dean Yang, 2013. "The Impact of Voucher Coupons on the Uptake of Fertilizer and Improved Seeds: Evidence from a Randomized Trial in Mozambique," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 95(5), pages 1345-1351.
    4. Norman Myers, 1998. "Lifting the veil on perverse subsidies," Nature, Nature, vol. 392(6674), pages 327-328, March.
    5. Paudel, Jayash & Crago, Christine L., 2017. "Fertilizer Subsidy and Agricultural Productivity: Empirical Evidence from Nepal," 2017 Annual Meeting, July 30-August 1, Chicago, Illinois 258464, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    6. Takeshima, Hiroyuki & Adhikari, Rajendra Prasad & Kaphle, Basu Dev & Shivakoti, Sabnam & Kumar, Anjani, 2016. "Determinants of chemical fertilizer use in Nepal: Insights based on price responsiveness and income effects:," IFPRI discussion papers 1507, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    7. Magnan, Nicholas & Spielman, David J. & Lybbert, Travis J. & Gulati, Kajal, 2015. "Leveling with friends: Social networks and Indian farmers' demand for a technology with heterogeneous benefits," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 223-251.
    8. Paudel, Pashupati & Shrestha, Arjun Kumar & Matsuoka, Atsushi, 2009. "Socio-economic Factors Influencing Adoption of Fertilizer for Maize Production in Nepal: A Cast Study of Chitwan District," 83rd Annual Conference, March 30 - April 1, 2009, Dublin, Ireland 51066, Agricultural Economics Society.
    9. Horowitz, John K., 2006. "The Becker-DeGroot-Marschak mechanism is not necessarily incentive compatible, even for non-random goods," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 93(1), pages 6-11, October.
    10. Michael R. Carter & Rachid Laajaj & Dean Yang, 2013. "The Impact of Voucher Coupons on the Uptake of Fertilizer and Improved Seeds: Evidence from a Randomized Trial in Mozambique," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 95(5), pages 1345-1351.
    11. Raut, Nani & Sitaula, Bishal K., 2012. "Assessment of Fertilizer Policy, Farmers’ Perceptions and Implications for Future Agricultural Development in Nepal," Sustainable Agriculture Research, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 1(2).
    12. David L. Ortega & Robert S. Shupp & Rodolfo M. Nayga & Jayson L. Lusk, 2018. "Mitigating overbidding behavior in agribusiness and food marketing research: Results from induced value hybrid auction experiments," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 34(4), pages 887-893, October.
    13. Timothy N. Cason & Charles R. Plott, 2014. "Misconceptions and Game Form Recognition: Challenges to Theories of Revealed Preference and Framing," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 122(6), pages 1235-1270.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Rami Rawashdeh, 2023. "Estimating short-run (SR) and long-run (LR) demand elasticities of phosphate," Mineral Economics, Springer;Raw Materials Group (RMG);Luleå University of Technology, vol. 36(2), pages 239-253, June.
    2. Ganesh Thapa & Yam Kanta Gaihre & Dyutiman Choudhary & Shriniwas Gautam, 2023. "Does private sector involvement improve the distribution efficiency of subsidized fertilizer? A natural experiment from Nepal," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 54(3), pages 429-446, May.

    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. Holden, Stein T., 2018. "The Economics of Fertilizer Subsidies," CLTS Working Papers 9/18, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Centre for Land Tenure Studies, revised 16 Oct 2019.
    2. Bonatti, Alessandro & Hörner, Johannes, 2017. "Learning to disagree in a game of experimentation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 234-269.
    3. Alain de Janvry & Élisabeth Sadoulet, 2023. "Seven propositions to support and finance the agricultural sector in sub-Saharan Africa in the context of climate change WP324," Working Papers hal-04123941, HAL.
    4. Magnan, Nicholas & Hoffmann, Vivian & Opoku, Nelson & Gajate Garrido, Gissele & Kanyam, Daniel Akwasi, 2021. "Information, technology, and market rewards: Incentivizing aflatoxin control in Ghana," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    5. Maurizio Canavari & Andreas C. Drichoutis & Jayson L. Lusk & Rodolfo M. Nayga, Jr., 2018. "How to run an experimental auction: A review of recent advances," Working Papers 2018-5, Agricultural University of Athens, Department Of Agricultural Economics.
    6. Bull, Charles & Courty, Pascal & Doyon, Maurice & Rondeau, Daniel, 2019. "Failure of the Becker–DeGroot–Marschak mechanism in inexperienced subjects: New tests of the game form misconception hypothesis," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 235-253.
    7. Mason, Nicole & Tembo, Solomon, 2015. "Do input Subsidies Reduce Poverty among Smallholder Farm Households? Panel Survey Evidence from Zambia," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 212233, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    8. Samir Mamadehussene & Francesco Sguera, 2023. "On the Reliability of the BDM Mechanism," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(2), pages 1166-1179, February.
    9. Jérémie Gignoux & Karen Macours & Daniel Stein & Kelsey Wright, 2023. "Input subsidies, credit constraints, and expectations of future transfers: Evidence from Haiti," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 105(3), pages 809-835, May.
    10. Mason, Nicole M. & Wineman, Ayala & Kirimi, Lilian & Mather, David, 2016. "The Effects of Kenya’s ‘Smarter’ Input Subsidy Program on Smallholder Behavior and Incomes: Do Different Quasi-Experimental Approaches Lead to the Same Conclusions?," Food Security Collaborative Working Papers 232090, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    11. Harou, Aurélie P. & Madajewicz, Malgosia & Michelson, Hope & Palm, Cheryl A. & Amuri, Nyambilila & Magomba, Christopher & Semoka, Johnson M. & Tschirhart, Kevin & Weil, Ray, 2022. "The joint effects of information and financing constraints on technology adoption: Evidence from a field experiment in rural Tanzania," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    12. Martina Occelli & Jorge Sellare & Kauê De Sousa & Matteo Dell'Acqua & Leida Mercado & Saul Paredes & Juan Robalino & Juan Carlos Rosas & Jacob van Etten, 2024. "Group‐based and citizen science on‐farm variety selection approaches for bean growers in Central America," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 55(2), pages 270-295, March.
    13. Rudolf, Katrin & Romero, Miriam & Asnawi, Rosyani & Irawan, Bambang & Wollni, Meike, 2020. "Effects of information and seedling provision on tree planting and survival in smallholder oil palm plantations," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    14. Paudel, Jayash & Crago, Christine L., 2017. "Fertilizer Subsidy and Agricultural Productivity: Empirical Evidence from Nepal," 2017 Annual Meeting, July 30-August 1, Chicago, Illinois 258464, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    15. Gashaw Tadesse Abate & Tanguy Bernard & Alan de Brauw & Nicholas Minot, 2018. "The impact of the use of new technologies on farmers’ wheat yield in Ethiopia: evidence from a randomized control trial," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 49(4), pages 409-421, July.
    16. Silvia Bou & Jordi Brandts & Magda Cayón & Pablo Guillén, 2016. "The price of luck: paying for the hot hand of others," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 2(1), pages 60-72, May.
    17. Sarah E. Castle & Daniel C. Miller & Pablo J. Ordonez & Kathy Baylis & Karl Hughes, 2021. "The impacts of agroforestry interventions on agricultural productivity, ecosystem services, and human well‐being in low‐ and middle‐income countries: A systematic review," Campbell Systematic Reviews, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(2), June.
    18. Jérémie Gignoux & Karen Macours & Daniel Stein & Kelsey Wright, 2021. "Agricultural input subsidies, credit constraints and expectations of future transfers: evidence from Haiti," Working Papers halshs-03131411, HAL.
    19. Aggarwal, Shilpa & Francis, Eilin & Robinson, Jonathan, 2018. "Grain today, gain tomorrow: Evidence from a storage experiment with savings clubs in Kenya," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 1-15.
    20. Parkhurst, Gregory M. & Nowell, Clifford, 2014. "The Role of Confidence in Truthful Revelation of Private Values," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 0, pages 1-16.

    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:fpr:ifprid:1812. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ifprius.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.