IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/ajagec/v96y2014i3p690-710..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Relative Preferences for Soil Conservation Incentives among Smallholder Farmers: Evidence from Malawi

Author

Listed:
  • Paswel Marenya
  • Vincent H. Smith
  • Ephraim Nkonya

Abstract

This paper uses framed choice experiments to examine the preferences of smallholder farmers in Malawi regarding alternative policy-based incentives to adopt conservation practices that reduce soil erosion and increase yields. The policy incentives offered in the choice experiments included an ideal index-based crop insurance contract, an index insurance contract with basis risk, cash payments, and fertilizer subsidies. Prior to implementing the choice experiments, the farmers participated in a workshop utilizing small group-based dynamic learning games that demonstrated how index-based crop insurance contracts function. The choice experiment results indicate that most farmers preferred cash payments to index insurance contracts, even when the insurance contracts offered substantially higher expected returns. Further, more risk averse farmers were more likely to prefer cash payments than less risk averse and risk loving farmers.

Suggested Citation

  • Paswel Marenya & Vincent H. Smith & Ephraim Nkonya, 2014. "Relative Preferences for Soil Conservation Incentives among Smallholder Farmers: Evidence from Malawi," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 96(3), pages 690-710.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:ajagec:v:96:y:2014:i:3:p:690-710.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/ajae/aat117
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Wang, Anbang & He, Ke & Zhang, Junbiao & Zeng, Yangmei, 2021. "Green Production Technologies and Technical Efficiency of Rice Farmers in China: A Case Study of Straw-Derived Biochar," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315026, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. Ward, Patrick S. & Mapemba, Lawrence & Bell, Andrew R., 2021. "Smart subsidies for sustainable soils: Evidence from a randomized controlled trial in southern Malawi," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    3. Meemken, Eva-Marie & Veettil, Prakashan Chellattan & Qaim, Matin, 2017. "Toward Improving the Design of Sustainability Standards—A Gendered Analysis of Farmers’ Preferences," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 285-298.
    4. Meemken, Eva-Marie & Veettil, Prakashan Chellattan & Qaim, Matin, 2016. "Small farmers’ preferences for the design of certification schemes: Does gender matter?," GlobalFood Discussion Papers 235484, Georg-August-Universitaet Goettingen, GlobalFood, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development.
    5. Kate Ambler & Alan de Brauw & Mike Murphy, 2023. "Increasing the adoption of conservation agriculture: A framed field experiment in Northern Ghana," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 54(5), pages 742-756, September.
    6. Mao, Hui & Zhou, Li & Ifft, Jennifer & Ying, RuiYao, 2019. "Risk preferences, production contracts and technology adoption by broiler farmers in China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 147-159.
    7. Williams Ali & Awudu Abdulai & Renan Goetz & Victor Owusu, 2021. "Risk, ambiguity and willingness to participate in crop insurance programs: Evidence from a field experiment," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 65(3), pages 679-703, July.
    8. Mao, Hui & Zhou, Li & Ifft, Jennifer, 2017. "Risk Preferences, Contracts and Technology Adoption by Broiler Farmers in China," 2017 Annual Meeting, July 30-August 1, Chicago, Illinois 257248, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    9. Bell, Andrew & Parkhurst, Gregory & Droppelmann, Klaus & Benton, Tim G., 2016. "Scaling up pro-environmental agricultural practice using agglomeration payments: Proof of concept from an agent-based model," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 32-41.
    10. Vaiknoras, Kate & Norton, George & Alwang, Jeffrey, 2015. "Farmer preferences for attributes of conservation agriculture in Uganda," African Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, African Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 10(2), pages 1-16.
    11. Teklewold, Hailemariam & Mekonnen, Alemu & Gebrehiwot, Tagel & Bezabih, Mintewab, 2020. "Open access post-harvest grazing and farmers’ preferences for forage production incentives in Ethiopia," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    12. Mao, Hui & Zhou, Li & Ying, RuiYao & Pan, Dan, 2021. "Time Preferences and green agricultural technology adoption: Field evidence from rice farmers in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    13. Smith, V. & De Pinto, A. & Robertson, R., 2018. "The Role of Risk in the Context of Climate Change, Land Use Choices and Crop Production: Evidence from Zambia," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277315, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    14. Jayne, T.S. & Sitko, Nicholas J. & Mason, Nicole M., 2017. "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).
    15. Patrick S. Ward & Simrin Makhija & David J. Spielman, 2020. "Drought‐tolerant rice, weather index insurance, and comprehensive risk management for smallholders: evidence from a multi‐year field experiment in India," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 64(2), pages 421-454, April.
    16. Deininger, Klaus W. & Xia, Fang, 2017. "Assessing Impacts of Large Scale Land Transfers: Challenges and Opportunities in Malawi’s Estate Sector," 2017 Annual Meeting, July 30-August 1, Chicago, Illinois 258112, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    17. Nugroho, Eko & Ihle, Rico & Heijman, Wim & Oosting, Simon J., 2024. "The role of forest user group membership in the extraction of teak forest resources for smallholder cattle farming," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    18. Schaafsma, Marije & Ferrini, Silvia & Turner, R. Kerry, 2019. "Assessing smallholder preferences for incentivised climate-smart agriculture using a discrete choice experiment," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    19. J. Nicolas Hernandez-Aguilera & Max Mauerman & Alexandra Herrera & Kathryn Vasilaky & Walter Baethgen & Ana Maria Loboguerrero & Rahel Diro & Yohana Tesfamariam Tekeste & Daniel Osgood, 2020. "Games and Fieldwork in Agriculture: A Systematic Review of the 21st Century in Economics and Social Science," Games, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-22, October.
    20. 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.
    21. 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.

    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:oup:ajagec:v:96:y:2014:i:3:p:690-710.. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.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.