IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/devpol/v39y2021i2p303-323.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Can agricultural subsidies reduce gendered productivity gaps? Panel data evidence from Zambia

Author

Listed:
  • Hambulo Ngoma
  • Henry Machina
  • Auckland N. Kuteya

Abstract

Motivation Farmer input support programmes (FISPs) have been implemented in sub‐Saharan Africa (SSA) since the 1970s in order to improve agricultural productivity and production. Whether FISPs are effective is much debated in the region. This article assesses whether FISPs can reduce gendered productivity gaps in agriculture, which in theory they should, by improving access to productive inputs for all farmers. Purpose Because FISPs improve access to productive inputs for women as well as men, this article asks whether subsidy programmes can reduce the gendered productivity gaps in agriculture. We assess the direct impacts of accessing FISP on maize productivity and whether these impacts are heterogeneous between women‐ and men‐managed plots. Approach and methods We combine the control function and the correlated random approaches to control for the endogeneity of access to FISPs and unobserved heterogeneity, and use the two‐wave panel of the Rural Agricultural Livelihoods Survey data collected in 2012 and 2015 in Zambia. The analysis is done at the level of farm plots. Findings Access to FISPs does not disproportionately raise maize productivity for women‐managed plots. This implies that a FISP alone is insufficient to address the gendered productivity gaps in agriculture. On average, FISPs were associated with average yield gains between 35 and 105 kg/ha in our sample, with larger gains for men‐managed subsamples. However, the use of fertilizers at these low rates of return is unlikely to be profitable for smallholder farmers. Policy implications Given that FISPs are likely to remain an important part of agricultural development policies in the region, there are reasons to believe they may have a role to play in reducing gendered gaps. However, reducing gendered productivity gaps in agriculture requires other non‐input factors that constrain women’s access to productive resources such as insecure land tenure and factors that limit the responsiveness of soils to fertilizer use among smallholder farmers to be addressed concomitantly.

Suggested Citation

  • Hambulo Ngoma & Henry Machina & Auckland N. Kuteya, 2021. "Can agricultural subsidies reduce gendered productivity gaps? Panel data evidence from Zambia," Development Policy Review, Overseas Development Institute, vol. 39(2), pages 303-323, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:devpol:v:39:y:2021:i:2:p:303-323
    DOI: 10.1111/dpr.12483
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/dpr.12483
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/dpr.12483?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. Fisher, Monica & Kandiwa, Vongai, 2014. "Can agricultural input subsidies reduce the gender gap in modern maize adoption? Evidence from Malawi," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 101-111.
    2. Nicole M. Mason & Thomas S. Jayne & Nicolas van de Walle, 2017. "The Political Economy of Fertilizer Subsidy Programs in Africa: Evidence from Zambia," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 99(3), pages 705-731.
    3. 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.
    4. Alderman, Harold, et al, 1995. "Unitary versus Collective Models of the Household: Is It Time to Shift the Burden of Proof?," The World Bank Research Observer, World Bank, vol. 10(1), pages 1-19, February.
    5. Bezu, Sosina & Kassie, Girma T. & Shiferaw, Bekele & Ricker-Gilbert, Jacob, 2014. "Impact of Improved Maize Adoption on Welfare of Farm Households in Malawi: A Panel Data Analysis," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 120-131.
    6. R. Wendy Karamba & Paul C. Winters, 2015. "Gender and agricultural productivity: implications of the Farm Input Subsidy Program in Malawi," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 46(3), pages 357-374, May.
    7. Vanya Slavchevska, 2015. "Gender differences in agricultural productivity: the case of Tanzania," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 46(3), pages 335-355, May.
    8. Cheryl R. Doss, 2018. "Women and agricultural productivity: Reframing the Issues," Development Policy Review, Overseas Development Institute, vol. 36(1), pages 35-50, January.
    9. Quisumbing, Agnes R. & Meinzen-Dick, Ruth Suseela & Raney, Terri L. & Croppenstedt, André & Behrman, Julia A. & Peterman, Amber, 2014. "Synopsis of Gender in agriculture: Closing the knowledge gap:," Issue briefs 84, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    10. Chirwa, Ephraim & Dorward, Andrew, 2013. "Agricultural Input Subsidies: The Recent Malawi Experience," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199683529.
    11. Nicole M. Mason & Thomas S. Jayne & Nicolas van de Walle, 2017. "The Political Economy of Fertilizer Subsidy Programs in Africa: Evidence from Zambia," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 99(3), pages 705-731.
    12. Zhiying Xu & Zhengfei Guan & T.S. Jayne & Roy Black, 2009. "Factors influencing the profitability of fertilizer use on maize in Zambia," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 40(4), pages 437-446, July.
    13. Tesfamicheal Wossen & Thomas Berger & Salvatore Di Falco, 2015. "Social capital, risk preference and adoption of improved farm land management practices in Ethiopia," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 46(1), pages 81-97, January.
    14. Christiaensen,Luc & Christiaensen,Luc, 2017. "Agriculture in Africa -- telling myths from facts : a synthesis," Policy Research Working Paper Series 7979, The World Bank.
    15. Mason, Nicole M. & Tembo, Solomon T., 2015. "Is FISP Reducing Poverty among Smallholder Farm Households in Zambia?," Food Security Collaborative Policy Briefs 207020, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    16. Agnes R. Quisumbing & Ruth Meinzen-Dick & Terri L. Raney & André Croppenstedt & Julia A. Behrman & A (ed.), 2014. "Gender in Agriculture," Springer Books, Springer, edition 127, number 978-94-017-8616-4, January.
    17. Jeffrey M Wooldridge, 2010. "Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 2, volume 1, number 0262232588, April.
    18. World Bank, 2012. "World Development Report 2012 [Rapport sur le développement dans le monde 2012]," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 4391.
    19. Andersson Djurfeldt, Agnes & Djurfeldt, Göran & Bergman Lodin, Johanna, 2013. "Geography of Gender Gaps: Regional Patterns of Income and Farm–Nonfarm Interaction Among Male- and Female-Headed Households in Eight African Countries," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 32-47.
    20. William J. Burke & Thom. S. Jayne & J. Roy Black, 2017. "Factors explaining the low and variable profitability of fertilizer application to maize in Zambia," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 48(1), pages 115-126, January.
    21. Wossen, Tesfamicheal & Abdoulaye, Tahirou & Alene, Arega & Feleke, Shiferaw & Ricker-Gilbert, Jacob & Manyong, Victor & Awotide, Bola Amoke, 2017. "Productivity and Welfare Effects of Nigeria's e-Voucher-Based Input Subsidy Program," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 251-265.
    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. Ikhide, Emily Edoisa & Umaru, Ezra K. & Oyebola, Fehintola & Omoju, Oluwasola E., 2021. "A CGE Analysis of the Gender Productivity Gap in Nigeria’s Agriculture Sector," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315922, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. Balasubramanian, Pooja & Ibanez, Marcela & Khan, Sarah & Sahoo, Soham, 2024. "Does women's economic empowerment promote human development in low- and middle-income countries? A meta-analysis," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    3. Justice A. Tambo & Lenis Saweda O. Liverpool‐Tasie, 2024. "Are farm input subsidies a disincentive for integrated pest management adoption? Evidence from Zambia," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 75(2), pages 740-763, June.

    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. Fujimoto, Takefumi & Suzuki, Aya, 2021. "Do Fertilizer and Seed Subsidies Strengthen Farmers' Market Participation? the Impact of Tanzania NAIVS on Farmers' Purchase of Agricultural Inputs and Their Maize-Selling Activities," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315044, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    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. Machina, Henry & Ngoma, Hambulo & Kuteya, Aukland, 2017. "Gendered impacts of agricultural subsidies in Zambia," MPRA Paper 87099, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Nicole M. Mason & Ayala Wineman & Solomon T. Tembo, 2020. "Reducing poverty by ‘ignoring the experts’? Evidence on input subsidies in Zambia," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 12(5), pages 1157-1172, October.
    5. Morgan, Stephen N. & Mason, Nicole M. & Levine, N. Kendra & Zulu-Mbata, Olipa, 2019. "Dis-incentivizing sustainable intensification? The case of Zambia’s maize-fertilizer subsidy program," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 54-69.
    6. Khushbu Mishra & Abdoul G. Sam & Gracious M. Diiro & Mario J. Miranda, 2020. "Gender and the dynamics of technology adoption: Empirical evidence from a household‐level panel data," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 51(6), pages 857-870, November.
    7. Xavier Giné & Shreena Patel & Bernardo Ribeiro & Ildrim Valley, 2022. "Efficiency and equity of input subsidies: Experimental evidence from Tanzania†," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 104(5), pages 1625-1655, October.
    8. Jongwoo Kim & Nicole M. Mason & David Mather & Felicia Wu, 2021. "The effects of the national agricultural input voucher scheme (NAIVS) on sustainable intensification of maize production in Tanzania," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(3), pages 857-877, September.
    9. Yoko Kijima, 2022. "Effect of Nigeria’s e-voucher input subsidy program on fertilizer use, rice production, and household income," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 14(4), pages 919-935, August.
    10. Burke, William J. & Jayne, Thom S. & Snapp, Sieglinde S., 2022. "Nitrogen efficiency by soil quality and management regimes on Malawi farms: Can fertilizer use remain profitable?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).
    11. Girma Gezimu Gebre & Hiroshi Isoda & Dil Bahadur Rahut & Yuichiro Amekawa & Hisako Nomura, 2021. "Gender Gaps in Market Participation Among Individual and Joint Decision-Making Farm Households: Evidence from Southern Ethiopia," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 33(3), pages 649-683, June.
    12. Mwale, Martin Limbikani & Fintel, Dieter von & Marchetta, Francesca & Smith, Anja & Kamninga, Tony Mwenda, 2021. "The Negative Impact of Farm Input Subsidies on Women's Agency in Malawi's Matrilocal Settlements," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315041, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    13. Tebogo B. Seleka, 2022. "Old wine in a new bottle? Impact of the ISPAAD input subsidy program on the subsistence economy in Botswana," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(1), pages 298-322, February.
    14. Matita, Mirriam & Chiwaula, Levison & Wadonda Chirwa, Ephraim & Mazalale, Jacob & Walls, Helen, 2022. "Subsidizing improved legume seeds for increased household dietary diversity: Evidence from Malawi’s Farm Input Subsidy Programme with implications for addressing malnutrition in all its forms," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    15. Veronique Theriault & Melinda Smale & Hamza Haider, 2018. "Economic incentives to use fertilizer on maize under differing agro-ecological conditions in Burkina Faso," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 10(5), pages 1263-1277, October.
    16. Mwale, Martin Limbikani, 2023. "Do agricultural subsidies matter for women’s attitude towards intimate partner violence? Evidence from Malawi," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    17. Cheryl Doss, 2015. "Women and Agricultural Productivity: What Does the Evidence Tell Us?," Working Papers 1051, Economic Growth Center, Yale University.
    18. Kilugala Malimi, 2023. "Agricultural input subsidies, extension services, and farm labour productivity nexus: Evidence from maize farmers in Tanzania," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 74(3), pages 874-898, September.
    19. Mason, N. & Morgan, S. & Levine, N.K. & Zulu-Mbata, O., 2018. "Dis-incentivizing sustainable intensification? The case of Zambia s fertilizer subsidy program," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277491, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    20. Girma Gezimu Gebre & Hiroshi Isoda & Dil Bahadur Rahut & Yuichiro Amekawa & Hisako Nomura, 0. "Gender Gaps in Market Participation Among Individual and Joint Decision-Making Farm Households: Evidence from Southern Ethiopia," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 0, pages 1-35.

    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:devpol:v:39:y:2021:i:2:p:303-323. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/odioruk.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.