IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cpr/ceprdp/9340.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Profitability of fertilizer: Experimental evidence from female rice farmers in Mali

Author

Listed:
  • Beaman, Lori
  • Karlan, Dean S.
  • Thuysbaert, Bram
  • Udry, Christopher

Abstract

In an experiment providing fertilizer grants to women rice farmers in Mali, we found that women who received fertilizer increased both the quantity of fertilizer they used on their plots and complementary inputs such as herbicides and hired labor. This highlights that farmers respond to an increase in availability of one input by re-optimizing other inputs, making it challenging to isolate the returns to any one input. We also found that while the increase in inputs led to a significantly higher level of output, we find no evidence that profits increased. Our results suggest that fertilizer's impact on profits is small compared to other sources of variation. This may make it difficult for farmers to observe the impact of fertilizer on their plots, and accordingly this affects their ability to learn about the returns to fertilizer and could affect their decision to adopt even in the absence of credit constraints.

Suggested Citation

  • Beaman, Lori & Karlan, Dean S. & Thuysbaert, Bram & Udry, Christopher, 2013. "Profitability of fertilizer: Experimental evidence from female rice farmers in Mali," CEPR Discussion Papers 9340, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  • Handle: RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:9340
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.cepr.org/active/publications/discussion_papers/dp.php?dpno=9340
    Download Restriction: CEPR Discussion Papers are free to download for our researchers, subscribers and members. If you fall into one of these categories but have trouble downloading our papers, please contact us at subscribers@cepr.org
    ---><---

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

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Esther Duflo & Michael Kremer & Jonathan Robinson, 2011. "Nudging Farmers to Use Fertilizer: Theory and Experimental Evidence from Kenya," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(6), pages 2350-2390, October.
    2. Esther Duflo & Michael Kremer & Jonathan Robinson, 2008. "How High Are Rates of Return to Fertilizer? Evidence from Field Experiments in Kenya," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(2), pages 482-488, May.
    3. Tavneet Suri, 2011. "Selection and Comparative Advantage in Technology Adoption," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 79(1), pages 159-209, January.
    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. 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.
    2. Sheahan, Megan & Black, Roy & Jayne, Thomas S., 2012. "Are Farmers Under-Utilizing Fertilizer? Evidence from Kenya," 2012 Conference, August 18-24, 2012, Foz do Iguacu, Brazil 126739, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    3. Terrance Hurley & Jawoo Koo & Kindie Tesfaye, 2018. "Weather risk: how does it change the yield benefits of nitrogen fertilizer and improved maize varieties in sub‐Saharan Africa?," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 49(6), pages 711-723, November.
    4. Tristan Le Cotty & Elodie Maître d’Hôtel & Raphael Soubeyran & Julie Subervie, 2018. "Linking Risk Aversion, Time Preference and Fertiliser Use in Burkina Faso," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 54(11), pages 1991-2006, November.
    5. Beaman, Lori & Karlan, Dean & Thuysbaert, Bram & Udry, Christopher, 2013. "Probability of Fertilizer: Experimental Evidence from Female Rice Farmers in Mali," Working Papers 111, Yale University, Department of Economics.
    6. Michelson, Hope & Fairbairn, Anna & Ellison, Brenna & Maertens, Annemie & Manyong, Victor, 2021. "Misperceived quality: Fertilizer in Tanzania," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    7. Sheremenko, Ganna & Magnan, Nicholas, 2015. "Gender-specific Risk Preferences and Fertilizer Use in Kenyan Farming Households," 2015 AAEA & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting, July 26-28, San Francisco, California 205766, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    8. Porteous, Obie, 2020. "Trade and agricultural technology adoption: Evidence from Africa," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    9. Chowdhury, Shyamal & Smits, Joeri & Sun, Qigang, 2020. "Contract structure, time preference, and technology adoption," GLO Discussion Paper Series 633, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    10. 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).
    11. Aklin, M. & Bayer, P. & Harish, S.P. & Urpelainen, J., 2018. "Economics of household technology adoption in developing countries: Evidence from solar technology adoption in rural India," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 35-46.
    12. Nyangena, Wilfred & Juma, Ogada Maurice, 2014. "Impact of Improved Farm Technologies on Yields: The Case of Improved Maize Varieties and Inorganic Fertilizer in Kenya," Discussion Papers dp-14-02-efd, Resources For the Future.
    13. Kibrom A. Abay & Mehari H. Abay & Mulubrhan Amare & Guush Berhane & Ermias Aynekulu, 2022. "Mismatch between soil nutrient deficiencies and fertilizer applications: Implications for yield responses in Ethiopia," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 53(2), pages 215-230, March.
    14. Abay, Kibrom A. & Berhane, Guush & Taffesse, Alemayehu Seyoum & Koru, Bethlehem & Abay, Kibrewossen, 2016. "Understanding farmers’ technology adoption decisions: Input complementarity and heterogeneity:," ESSP working papers 82, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    15. Beaman, Lori & Dillon, Andrew, 2018. "Diffusion of agricultural information within social networks: Evidence on gender inequalities from Mali," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 147-161.
    16. Jonas Kathage & Menale Kassie & Bekele Shiferaw & Matin Qaim, 2016. "Big Constraints or Small Returns? Explaining Nonadoption of Hybrid Maize in Tanzania," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 38(1), pages 113-131.
    17. 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.
    18. Dominik Naeher, 2022. "Technology Adoption Under Costly Information Processing," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 63(2), pages 699-753, May.
    19. Matsumoto, Tomoya, 2014. "Disseminating new farming practices among small scale farmers: An experimental intervention in Uganda," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 43-74.
    20. Stefanija Veljanoska, 2022. "Do Remittances Promote Fertilizer Use? The Case of Ugandan Farmers," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 104(1), pages 273-293, January.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    agricultural economics; returns to fertilizer;

    JEL classification:

    • O12 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Microeconomic Analyses of Economic Development
    • O13 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Agriculture; Natural Resources; Environment; Other Primary Products
    • Q12 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Micro Analysis of Farm Firms, Farm Households, and Farm Input Markets

    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:cpr:ceprdp:9340. 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: . General contact details of provider: https://www.cepr.org .

    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: (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cepr.org .

    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.