IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/agecon/v45y2014i6p663-678.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Fertilizer subsidies and private market participation: the case of Kano State, Nigeria

Author

Listed:
  • Lenis Saweda O. Liverpool-Tasie

Abstract

This article estimates the effect of a fertilizer voucher program on farmer participation in the private fertilizer market in Nigeria. Using a double-hurdle model (to address corner solution challenges with estimating input demand) and a control function approach (to account for the endogeneity of subsidized fertilizer acquired), the study finds evidence that receiving subsidized fertilizer in Kano, Nigeria increased both the probability and extent of participation in the private fertilizer market. Findings demonstrate that under certain circumstances, e.g., where input dealers’ links to farmer are weak; there could be significant gains from the temporary use of voucher programs to strengthen such links.

Suggested Citation

  • Lenis Saweda O. Liverpool-Tasie, 2014. "Fertilizer subsidies and private market participation: the case of Kano State, Nigeria," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 45(6), pages 663-678, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:agecon:v:45:y:2014:i:6:p:663-678
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/agec.12114
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Vella, F. & Verbeek, M., 1993. "Estimating and testing Simultaneous Equation Panel Data Models with Censored Endogenous Variables," Papers 9359, Tilburg - Center for Economic Research.
    2. Nigel Key & Elisabeth Sadoulet & Alain De Janvry, 2000. "Transactions Costs and Agricultural Household Supply Response," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 82(2), pages 245-259.
    3. Nicole M. Mason & Thomas S. Jayne, 2014. "Fertiliser subsidies and smallholder commercial fertiliser purchases: crowding out, leakage, and policy implications for Zambia," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 65(2), pages 527-528, June.
    4. Vella, Francis, 1993. "A Simple Estimator for Simultaneous Models with Censored Endogenous Regressors," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 34(2), pages 441-457, May.
    5. Marc F. Bellemare & Christopher B. Barrett, 2006. "An Ordered Tobit Model of Market Participation: Evidence from Kenya and Ethiopia," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 88(2), pages 324-337.
    6. Garen, John, 1984. "The Returns to Schooling: A Selectivity Bias Approach with a Continuous Choice Variable," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(5), pages 1199-1218, September.
    7. Smith, Richard J & Blundell, Richard W, 1986. "An Exogeneity Test for a Simultaneous Equation Tobit Model with an Application to Labor Supply," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 54(3), pages 679-685, May.
    8. Ellis,Frank, 1992. "Agricultural Policies in Developing Countries," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521395847.
    9. Coady, David P, 1995. "An Empirical Analysis of Fertilizer Use in Pakistan," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 62(246), pages 213-234, May.
    10. Banful, Afua Branoah, 2011. "Old Problems in the New Solutions? Politically Motivated Allocation of Program Benefits and the "New" Fertilizer Subsidies," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 39(7), pages 1166-1176, July.
    11. Andre Croppenstedt & Mulat Demeke & Meloria M. Meschi, 2003. "Technology Adoption in the Presence of Constraints: the Case of Fertilizer Demand in Ethiopia," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 7(1), pages 58-70, February.
    12. Krausova, Marika & Banful, Afua Branoah, 2010. "Overview of the agricultural input sector in Ghana," IFPRI discussion papers 1024, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    13. A. D. Roy, 1951. "Some Thoughts On The Distribution Of Earnings," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 3(2), pages 135-146.
    14. Heckman, James J. & Lalonde, Robert J. & Smith, Jeffrey A., 1999. "The economics and econometrics of active labor market programs," Handbook of Labor Economics, in: O. Ashenfelter & D. Card (ed.), Handbook of Labor Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 31, pages 1865-2097, Elsevier.
    15. Alex Winter‐Nelson & Anna Temu, 2005. "Impacts of prices and transactions costs on input usage in a liberalizing economy: evidence from Tanzanian coffee growers," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 33(3), pages 243-253, November.
    16. Liverpool-Tasie, Saweda L.O. & Banful, Afua Branoah & Olaniyan, Babatunde, 2010. "Assessment of the 2009 fertilizer voucher program in Kano and Taraba, Nigeria:," NSSP working papers 17, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    17. Garth Holloway & Simeon Ehui & Amare Teklu, 2008. "Bayes estimates of distance-to-market: transactions costs, cooperatives and milk-market development in the Ethiopian highlands," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(5), pages 683-696.
    18. Michael Morris & Valerie A. Kelly & Ron J. Kopicki & Derek Byerlee, 2007. "Fertilizer Use in African Agriculture : Lessons Learned and Good Practice Guidelines," World Bank Publications, The World Bank, number 6650, January.
    19. Minot, Nicholas & Benson, Todd, 2009. "Fertilizer subsidies in Africa: Are vouchers the answer?," Issue briefs 60, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    20. Zhiying Xu & William J. Burke & Thomas S. Jayne & Jones Govereh, 2009. "Do input subsidy programs “crowd in” or “crowd out” commercial market development? Modeling fertilizer demand in a two‐channel marketing system," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 40(1), pages 79-94, January.
    21. Rivers, Douglas & Vuong, Quang H., 1988. "Limited information estimators and exogeneity tests for simultaneous probit models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 347-366, November.
    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. Sibande, Lonester & Bailey, Alastair & Davidova, Sophia, 2017. "The impact of farm input subsidies on maize marketing in Malawi," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 190-206.
    2. Jayne, Thomas S. & Mason, Nicole M. & Burke, William J. & Ariga, Joshua, 2018. "Review: Taking stock of Africa’s second-generation agricultural input subsidy programs," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 1-14.
    3. 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?," Working Papers 233674, Egerton University, Tegemeo Institute of Agricultural Policy and Development.
    4. Jayne, T.S. & Mason, Nicole M. & Burke, William J. & Ariga, Joshua, 2016. "Agricultural Input Subsidy Programs In Africa: An Assessment Of Recent Evidence," Feed the Future Innovation Lab for Food Security Policy Research Papers 259509, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics, Feed the Future Innovation Lab for Food Security (FSP).
    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. Amadu, Festus O. & Miller, Daniel C. & McNamara, Paul E., 2020. "Agroforestry as a pathway to agricultural yield impacts in climate-smart agriculture investments: Evidence from southern Malawi," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    7. Khor, Ling & Zeller, Manfred, 2015. "Perception of Substandard Fertilizer and Its Impact on Use Intensity," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 211843, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    8. Kaiyatsa, Stevier & Jumbe, Charles & Ricker-Gilbert, Jacob, 2017. "Supply-side Crowding-out and Crowding-in Effects of Malawi’s Farm Input Subsidy Program on Private-sector Input Marketing: A Quasi-experimental Field Study," 2017 Annual Meeting, July 30-August 1, Chicago, Illinois 258135, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    9. David L. Mather & Thomas S. Jayne, 2018. "Fertilizer subsidies and the role of targeting in crowding out: evidence from Kenya," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 10(2), pages 397-417, April.
    10. Mather, David & Minde, Isaac, 2016. "Fertilizer subsidies and how targeting conditions crowding in/out: An assessment of smallholder fertilizer demand in Tanzania," Food Security Collaborative Working Papers 260442, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    11. Hayatullah Ahmadzai, 2018. "Factor market participation and tests for separability in Afghanistan," Discussion Papers 2018-10, University of Nottingham, CREDIT.
    12. Levine, Kendra & Mason, Nicole M., 2014. "Do input subsidies crowd in or crowd out other soil fertility management practices? Evidence from Zambia," 2014 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2014, Minneapolis, Minnesota 170689, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    13. Jacob Ricker-Gilbert & T. S. Jayne, 2017. "Estimating the Enduring Effects of Fertiliser Subsidies on Commercial Fertiliser Demand and Maize Production: Panel Data Evidence from Malawi," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 68(1), pages 70-97, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:bla:agecon:v:45:y:2014:i:6:p:663-678. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Wiley Content Delivery). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/iaaeeea.html .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.