IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/midcpb/232093.html

The effects of Kenya’s ‘smarter’ input subsidy

Author

Listed:
  • Mason, Nicole M.
  • Wineman, Ayala
  • Kirimi, Lilian
  • Mather, David

Abstract

Kenya joined the ranks of sub-Saharan African (SSA) countries implementing a targeted input subsidy program for inorganic fertilizer and improved seed in 2007 with the establishment of the National Accelerated Agricultural Inputs Access Program’s “Kilimo Plus” initiative. Implemented from 2007/08, Kilimo Plus aimed to provide 50 kg each of basal and top dressing fertiliser, and 10 kg of improved maize seed to resource poor smallholder farmers with the goals of increasing access to inputs,raising yields and incomes, improving food security, and reducing poverty. But did the program achieve its goals, and what are the lessons learned from Kilimo Plus and other targeted input subsidy programs (ISPs) in SSA for the design and implementation of future county-level input policies and programs in Kenya? Results suggest that, despite replacing what would have been commercial fertilizer purchases by farmers, Kilimo Plus did substantially increase maize production and reduce poverty depth and severity of recipient households. Moreover, the program’s positive effects are somewhat larger than those of targeted ISPs in Malawi and Zambia. Much of Kilimo Plus’s relative success vis-à-vis the Malawi and Zambia programs is likely due to its effective targeting of relatively resource-poor farmers and its implementation through vouchers redeemable at private agro-dealer shops. Kenyan counties considering implementing ISPs should bear in mind these findings, but also carefully weigh the cost effectiveness of ISPs relative to other much-needed investments, including rural roads and agricultural research, development, and extension. Indeed, since Kilimo Plus alone is not sufficient to bring households out of poverty, a more holistic approach to improving production and sustainable intensification is required. This may imply use of vouchers for other crops and inputs, particularly those which enhance soil health such as lime, as well as an increase in complementary public/private investments in research, extension, irrigation, transport infrastructure, information, and affordable and appropriate innovations.

Suggested Citation

  • Mason, Nicole M. & Wineman, Ayala & Kirimi, Lilian & Mather, David, 2015. "The effects of Kenya’s ‘smarter’ input subsidy," Food Security Collaborative Policy Briefs 232093, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:midcpb:232093
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.232093
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/232093/files/Policy_Brief_11.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.232093?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. 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 212448, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. Mason, Nicole M. & Tembo, Solomon T., 2015. "Do Input Subsidy Programs Raise Incomes and Reduce Poverty among Smallholder Farm Households? Evidence from Zambia," Food Security Collaborative Working Papers 198702, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    3. Foster, James & Greer, Joel & Thorbecke, Erik, 1984. "A Class of Decomposable Poverty Measures," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(3), pages 761-766, May.
    4. Ricker-Gilbert, Jacob & Jayne, Thomas S., 2011. "What are the Enduring Effects of Fertilizer Subsidy Programs on Recipient Farm Households? Evidence from Malawi," Staff Paper Series 109593, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    5. Sheahan, Megan & Black, Roy & Jayne, T.S., 2013. "Are Kenyan farmers under-utilizing fertilizer? Implications for input intensification strategies and research," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 39-52.
    6. repec:wbk:wbpubs:6650 is not listed on IDEAS
    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. Sitko, Nicholas J. & Jayne, T.S., "undated". "Integrating Climate- and Market-Smartness into Strategies for Sustainable Productivity Growth of African Agri-food Systems," Feed the Future Innovation Lab for Food Security Policy Research Papers 270643, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics, Feed the Future Innovation Lab for Food Security (FSP).
    2. Jayne, T.S. & Sitko, Nicholas J. & Mason, Nicole M., "undated". "Can Input Subsidy Programs Contribute To Climate Smart Agriculture?," Feed the Future Innovation Lab for Food Security Policy Research Papers 270626, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics, Feed the Future Innovation Lab for Food Security (FSP).

    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. Mason, Nicole M. & Wineman, Ayala & Kirimi, Lilian & Mather, David, "undated". "The Effects Of Kenya’S ‘Smarter’ Input Subsidy Program On Smallholder Behavior And Incomes: Do Different Quasi-Experimental Approaches Lead To The Same Conclusions?," Feed the Future Innovation Lab for Food Security Policy Research Papers 259532, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics, Feed the Future Innovation Lab for Food Security (FSP).
    2. Nicole M. Mason & Ayala Wineman & Lilian Kirimi & David Mather, 2017. "The Effects of Kenya's ‘Smarter’ Input Subsidy Programme on Smallholder Behaviour and Incomes: Do Different Quasi-experimental Approaches Lead to the Same Conclusions?," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 68(1), pages 45-69, February.
    3. Zinnbauer, Maximilian & Mockshell, Jonathan & Zeller, Manfred, 2018. "Effects if Fertilizer Subsidies in Zambia: A Literature Review," MPRA Paper 84125, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Fung, Winnie & Liverpool-Tasie, Saweda & Mason, Nicole & Uwaifo Oyelere, Ruth, 2015. "Can Crop Purchase Programs Reduce Poverty and Improve Welfare in Rural Communities? Evidence from the Food Reserve Agency in Zambia," IZA Discussion Papers 9361, IZA Network @ LISER.
    5. Jayne, T.S. & Mason, Nicole M. & Burke, William J. & Ariga, Joshua, "undated". "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).
    6. 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.
    7. Harou, Aurélie P., 2018. "Unraveling the effect of targeted input subsidies on dietary diversity in household consumption and child nutrition: The case of Malawi," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 124-135.
    8. Mason, Nicole M. & Jayne, T.S. & Mofya-Mukuka, Rhoda, 2013. "A Review of Zambia’s Agricultural Input Subsidy Programs: Targeting, Impacts, and the Way Forward," Food Security Collaborative Working Papers 162438, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    9. Ragasa, Catherine & Mazunda, John, 2018. "The impact of agricultural extension services in the context of a heavily subsidized input system: The case of Malawi," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 25-47.
    10. Ricome, Aymeric & Barreiro-Hurle, Jesus & Sadibou Fall, Cheickh, 2024. "Government fertilizer subsidies, input use, and income: The case of Senegal," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 124(C).
    11. Lunduka, Rodney & Ricker-Gilbert, Jacob & Shively, Gerald & Jayne, Thom, 2014. "Redefining the goals and objectives of the Farm Input Subsidy Program (FISP) in Malawi," Food Security Collaborative Policy Briefs 234945, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    12. Mason, Nicole M. & Tembo, Solomon T., 2015. "Do Input Subsidy Programs Raise Incomes and Reduce Poverty among Smallholder Farm Households? Evidence from Zambia," Food Security Collaborative Working Papers 198702, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    13. Kopper, Sarah A. & Jayne, Thomas S. & Snapp, Sieglinde S., 2020. "Sifting through the weeds: Understanding heterogeneity in fertilizer and labor response in Central Malawi," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    14. Shijiang Chen & Mingyue Liang & Wen Yang, 2022. "Does Digital Financial Inclusion Reduce China’s Rural Household Vulnerability to Poverty: An Empirical Analysis From the Perspective of Household Entrepreneurship," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(2), pages 21582440221, June.
    15. Khanna, Neha, 2000. "Measuring environmental quality: an index of pollution," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 191-202, November.
    16. Do, Manh Hung & Nguyen, Trung Thanh & Grote, Ulrike, 2023. "Land consolidation, rice production, and agricultural transformation: Evidence from household panel data for Vietnam," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 157-173.
    17. Clarke, Philip & Erreygers, Guido, 2020. "Defining and measuring health poverty," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 244(C).
    18. Davidson, Russell & Flachaire, Emmanuel, 2007. "Asymptotic and bootstrap inference for inequality and poverty measures," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 141(1), pages 141-166, November.
    19. Chakravarty, Satya R. & Deutsch, Joseph & Silber, Jacques, 2008. "On the Watts Multidimensional Poverty Index and its Decomposition," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 1067-1077, June.
    20. Xuming He & Heng Xi & Xianbo Li, 2024. "Multi-Dimensional Decomposition, Measurement, and Governance Mechanism of Relative Poverty in Chinese Households under the Goal of Common Prosperity: Empirical Analysis Based on CFPS2020 Data," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(12), pages 1-24, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ags:midcpb:232093. 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/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.