IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i19p10608-d642308.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Economic Feasibility of Iodine Agronomic Biofortification: A Projective Analysis with Ugandan Vegetable Farmers

Author

Listed:
  • Solomon Olum

    (Department of Food Science and Postharvest Technology, Gulu University, Gulu P.O. Box 166, Uganda
    Department of Agricultural Economics, Ghent University, Coupure Links 653, 9000 Gent, Belgium)

  • Xavier Gellynck

    (Department of Agricultural Economics, Ghent University, Coupure Links 653, 9000 Gent, Belgium)

  • Joshua Wesana

    (Department of Agricultural Economics, Ghent University, Coupure Links 653, 9000 Gent, Belgium
    Food and Markets Department, Natural Resources Institute, University of Greenwich, Chatham ME4 4TB, UK)

  • Walter Odongo

    (Department of Rural Development and Agribusiness, Gulu University, Gulu P.O. Box 166, Uganda)

  • Nathaline Onek Aparo

    (Department of Agricultural Economics, Ghent University, Coupure Links 653, 9000 Gent, Belgium
    Department of Rural Development and Agribusiness, Gulu University, Gulu P.O. Box 166, Uganda)

  • Bonny Aloka

    (Department of Science and Vocational Education, Lira University, Lira P.O. Box 1035, Uganda)

  • Duncan Ongeng

    (Department of Food Science and Postharvest Technology, Gulu University, Gulu P.O. Box 166, Uganda)

  • Hans De Steur

    (Department of Agricultural Economics, Ghent University, Coupure Links 653, 9000 Gent, Belgium)

Abstract

Cost–benefit analysis of (iodine) biofortification at farm level is limited in the literature. This study aimed to analyze the economic feasibility of applying iodine-rich fertilizers (agronomic biofortification) to cabbage and cowpea in Northern Uganda. Data on costs and revenues were obtained from a survey of 100 farmers, and benefits that would accrue from using iodine fertilizers were elicited using consumers’ willingness to pay (WTP) for the iodine-biofortified vegetables. The cost–benefit analysis demonstrated iodine agronomic biofortification as a highly profitable effort, generating average benefit–cost ratios (BCRs) of 3.13 and 5.69 for cabbage and cowpea production, respectively, higher than the conventional production practice. However, the projective analysis showed substantive variations of economic gains from iodine biofortification among farmers, possibly due to differences in farming practices and managerial capabilities. For instance, only 74% of cabbage farmers would produce at a BCR above 1 if they were to apply iodine fertilizer. Furthermore, a sensitivity analysis to estimate the effect of subsidizing the cost of iodine fertilizer showed that a higher proportion of farmers would benefit from iodine biofortification. Therefore, as biofortification is considered a health policy intervention targeting the poor and vulnerable, farmers could be supported through fertilizer subsidies to lower the production cost of iodine-biofortified foods and to avoid passing on the price burden to vulnerable consumers.

Suggested Citation

  • Solomon Olum & Xavier Gellynck & Joshua Wesana & Walter Odongo & Nathaline Onek Aparo & Bonny Aloka & Duncan Ongeng & Hans De Steur, 2021. "Economic Feasibility of Iodine Agronomic Biofortification: A Projective Analysis with Ugandan Vegetable Farmers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-13, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:19:p:10608-:d:642308
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/19/10608/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/19/10608/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:ken:wpaper:0901 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Kassahun, Habtamu Tilahun & Nicholson, Charles F. & Jacobsen, Jette Bredahl & Steenhuis, Tammo S., 2016. "Accounting for user expectations in the valuation of reliable irrigation water access in the Ethiopian highlands," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 168(C), pages 45-55.
    3. Okoboi, Godfrey & Barungi, Mildred, 2012. "Constraints to Fertiliser Use in Uganda: Insights from Uganda Census of Agriculture 2008/9," Research Series 150240, Economic Policy Research Centre (EPRC).
    4. Yukichika Kawata & Masahide Watanabe, 2018. "Economic feasibility of Campylobacter†reduced chicken: Do consumers have high willingness to pay?," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 34(2), pages 222-239, March.
    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. Idiaye, C.O. ; Oluwatayo, I.B. ; Obiano, N.C., 2024. "Consumer Perception and Willingness to Pay for Vitamin A Fortified Garri in Ibadan North Local Government Area of Oyo State, Nigeria," Research on World Agricultural Economy, Nan Yang Academy of Sciences Pte Ltd (NASS), vol. 5(3), September.

    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. Giuseppe Maggio & Marina Mastrorillo & Nicholas J. Sitko, 2022. "Adapting to High Temperatures: Effect of Farm Practices and Their Adoption Duration on Total Value of Crop Production in Uganda," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 104(1), pages 385-403, January.
    2. Manhique, Henrique & Wätzold, Frank, 2023. "Effects of Institutional Setting on Value Estimates of Stated Preference Surveys in Developing Economies: A Discrete Choice Experiment on Conserving Biodiversity in The Cape Floristic Region," MPRA Paper 118750, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Habtamu Tilahun Kassahun & Bo Jellesmark Thorsen & Joffre Swait & Jette Bredahl Jacobsen, 2020. "Social Cooperation in the Context of Integrated Private and Common Land Management," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 75(1), pages 105-136, January.
    4. Todd Benson & Tewodaj Mogues, 2018. "Constraints in the fertilizer supply chain: evidence for fertilizer policy development from three African countries," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 10(6), pages 1479-1500, December.
    5. Ssebaggala, Moses & Karuaihe, Selma T., 2023. "Evaluating households’ willingness to pay for private water supply services in Wakiso District, Uganda," African Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, African Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 18(1), May.
    6. Kassahun, Habtamu Tilahun & Jacobsen, Jette Bredahl & Nicholson, Charles F., 2020. "Revisiting money and labor for valuing environmental goods and services in developing countries," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    7. Luisa Bettili & Eva Pek & Maher Salman, 2019. "A Decision Support System for Water Resources Management: The Case Study of Mubuku Irrigation Scheme, Uganda," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(22), pages 1-19, November.
    8. Kelvin Balcombe & Dylan Bradley & Iain Fraser, 2021. "Do Consumers Really Care? An Economic Analysis of Consumer Attitudes Towards Food Produced Using Prohibited Production Methods," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(2), pages 452-469, June.
    9. Ahaibwe, Gemma & Mbowa, Swaibu & Lwanga, Musa Mayanja, 2013. "Youth Engagement in Agriculture in Uganda: Challenges and Prospects," Research Series 159673, Economic Policy Research Centre (EPRC).
    10. Abate, Tenaw G. & Börger, Tobias & Aanesen, Margrethe & Falk-Andersson, Jannike & Wyles, Kayleigh J. & Beaumont, Nicola, 2020. "Valuation of marine plastic pollution in the European Arctic: Applying an integrated choice and latent variable model to contingent valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    11. Chitra Pandey & Hema Diwan, 2021. "Assessing fertilizer use behaviour for environmental management and sustainability: a quantitative study in agriculturally intensive regions of Uttar Pradesh, India," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(4), pages 5822-5845, April.
    12. Kelvin Balcombe & Dylan Bradley & Iain Fraser, 2021. "Consumer Preferences for Chlorine Washed Chicken, Attitudes to Brexit and Trade Agreements," Studies in Economics 2112, School of Economics, University of Kent.
    13. Riccardo Scarpa & Claudia Bazzani & Diego Begalli & Roberta Capitello, 2021. "Resolvable and Near‐epistemic Uncertainty in Stated Preference for Olive Oil: An Empirical Exploration," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(2), pages 335-369, June.
    14. Kelvin Balcombe & Dylan Bradley & Iain Fraser, 2020. "The Economic Analysis of Consumer Attitudes Towards Food Produced Using Prohibited Production Methods: Do Consumers Really Care?," Studies in Economics 2004, School of Economics, University of Kent.
    15. Kassahun, Habtamu Tilahun & Swait, Joffre & Jacobsen, Jette Bredahl, 2021. "Distortions in willingness-to-pay for public goods induced by endemic distrust in institutions," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    16. Courtney Blair & Erica Gralla & Finley Wetmore & Jarrod Goentzel & Megan Peters, 2021. "A Systems Framework for International Development: The Data‐Layered Causal Loop Diagram," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 30(12), pages 4374-4395, December.
    17. Berhe, Gebremeskel Teklay & Baartman, Jantiene E.M. & Veldwisch, Gert Jan & Grum, Berhane & Ritsema, Coen J., 2022. "Irrigation development and management practices in Ethiopia: A systematic review on existing problems, sustainability issues and future directions," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 274(C).
    18. Mwaura, Francis M. & Muwanika, Fred R., 2018. "Providing irrigation water as a public utility to enhance agricultural productivity in Uganda," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 99-109.
    19. Powell Mponela & Julius Manda & Michael Kinyua & Job Kihara, 2023. "Participatory Action Research, Social Networks, and Gender Influence Soil Fertility Management in Tanzania," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 36(1), pages 141-163, February.
    20. Barrett,Christopher B. & Sheahan,Megan Britney & Barrett,Christopher B. & Sheahan,Megan Britney, 2014. "Understanding the agricultural input landscape in Sub-Saharan Africa : recent plot, household, and community-level evidence," Policy Research Working Paper Series 7014, The World Bank.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:19:p:10608-:d:642308. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.