IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hhs/gunwpe/0340.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Soil Properties and Soil Conservation Investments in Agricultural Production - a Case study of Kenya’s Central Highlands

Author

Listed:
  • Ekbom, Anders

    () (Department of Economics, School of Business, Economics and Law, Göteborg University)

  • Sterner, Thomas

    (Department of Economics, School of Business, Economics and Law, Göteborg University)

Abstract

This paper integrates traditional economic variables, soil properties and variables on soil conservation technologies in order to estimate agricultural output among small-scale farmers in Kenya’s central highlands. The study has methodological, empirical as well as policy results. The key methodological result is that integrating traditional economics and soil science is highly worthwhile in this area of research. Omitting measures of soil capital can cause omitted variables bias since farmers’ choice of inputs depend both on the quality and status of the soil capital and on other economic conditions such as availability and cost of labour, fertilizers, manure and other inputs. The study shows that: (i) models which include soil capital and soil conservation technologies yield a considerably lower output elasticity of farm-yard manure; (ii) mean output elasticities of key soil nutrients like nitrogen (N) and potassium (K) are positive and relatively large; (iii) counter to our expectations, the mean output elasticity of phosphorus (P) is negative; (iv) soil conservation technologies like green manure and terraces are positively associated with output and yield relatively large output elasticities. The central policy conclusion is that while fertilizers are generally beneficial, their application is a complex art and more is not necessarily better. The limited local market supply of fertilizers, combined with the different output effects of N, P and K, point at the importance of improving the performance of input markets and strengthening agricultural extension. Further, given the policy debate on the impact and usefulness of government subsidies to soil conservation, our results suggest that soil conservation investments contribute to increase farmers’ output. Consequently, government support to appropriate soil conservation investments arrests soil erosion, prevents downstream externalities and assists farmers’ efforts to increase food production and food security.

Suggested Citation

  • Ekbom, Anders & Sterner, Thomas, 2009. "Soil Properties and Soil Conservation Investments in Agricultural Production - a Case study of Kenya’s Central Highlands," Working Papers in Economics 340, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:hhs:gunwpe:0340
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/2077/19233
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Christensen, Laurits R & Jorgenson, Dale W & Lau, Lawrence J, 1973. "Transcendental Logarithmic Production Frontiers," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 55(1), pages 28-45, February.
    2. Peter Berck & Gloria Helfand, 1990. "Reconciling the von Liebig and Differentiable Crop Production Functions," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 72(4), pages 985-996.
    3. Simmons, Peter & Weiserbs, Daniel, 1979. "Translog Flexible Functional Forms and Associated Demand Systems," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 69(5), pages 892-901, December.
    4. Fulginiti, Lilyan E. & Perrin, Richard K., 1998. "Agricultural productivity in developing countries," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 19(1-2), pages 45-51, September.
    5. Mundlak, Yair & Larson, Don & Butzer, Ritz, 1997. "The determinants of agricultural production : a cross-country analysis," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1827, The World Bank.
    6. Gerdin, Anders, 2002. "Productivity and economic growth in Kenyan agriculture, 1964-1996," Agricultural Economics of Agricultural Economists, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 27(1), May.
    7. Widawsky, David & Rozelle, Scott & Jin, Songqing & Huang, Jikun, 1998. "Pesticide productivity, host-plant resistance and productivity in China," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 19(1-2), pages 203-217, September.
    8. Byiringiro, Fidele Usabuwera & Reardon, Thomas, 1996. "Farm productivity in Rwanda: effects of farm size, erosion, and soil conservation investments," Agricultural Economics of Agricultural Economists, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 15(2), November.
    9. Michael D. Frank & Bruce R. Beattie & Mary E. Embleton, 1990. "A Comparison of Alternative Crop Response Models," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 72(3), pages 597-603.
    10. Berndt, Ernst R & Christensen, Laurits R, 1974. "Testing for the Existence of a Consistent Aggregate Index of Labor Inputs," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 64(3), pages 391-404, June.
    11. Peter Berck & Jacqueline Geoghegan & Stephen Stohs, 2000. "A Strong Test of the von Liebig Hypothesis," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 82(4), pages 948-955.
    12. Obare, G. A. & Omamo, S. W. & Williams, J. C., 2003. "Smallholder production structure and rural roads in Africa: the case of Nakuru District, Kenya," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 28(3), pages 245-254, May.
    13. Sherlund, Shane M. & Barrett, Christopher B. & Adesina, Akinwumi A., 2002. "Smallholder technical efficiency controlling for environmental production conditions," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 85-101, October.
    14. Hanan G. Jacoby, 1993. "Shadow Wages and Peasant Family Labour Supply: An Econometric Application to the Peruvian Sierra," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 60(4), pages 903-921.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    micro analysis of farm firms; resource management;

    JEL classification:

    • Q12 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Micro Analysis of Farm Firms, Farm Households, and Farm Input Markets
    • Q20 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - General

    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:hhs:gunwpe:0340. 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: (Marie Andersson). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/naiguse.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.