Do input subsidy programs “crowd in” or “crowd out” commercial market development? Modeling fertilizer demand in a two‐channel marketing system

Many governments in developing countries distribute fertilizer at subsidized prices in an effort to stimulate small farmers' agricultural productivity and food security. Prior fertilizer demand studies have largely failed to account for the effects of government programs on farmers' commercial purchases. Using a double hurdle model and nationally representative rural household panel data in Zambia, we distinguish between these sources and measure the contemporaneous “crowding in” and “crowding out” effects of government input programs on commercial fertilizer sales. Where the private sector is relatively active and average wealth is higher (areas seemingly more likely to be targeted by government programs), results indicate that subsidies have substantially crowded out the private sector, in some cases to the point that such programs could actually lower overall fertilizer use. On the other hand, in poorer areas where the private sector is relatively inactive, subsidies help to generate demand and crowd in private sector retailers. Empirical studies explicitly modeling farmers' fertilizer purchase behavior within a dual marketing framework can provide important insights for agricultural policy discussions in developing countries.

[1]  E. Chirwa,et al.  Adoption of fertiliser and hybrid seeds by smallholder maize farmers in Southern Malawi , 2005 .

[2]  Jonathan Isham,et al.  The Effect of Social Capital on Fertiliser Adoption: Evidence from Rural Tanzania , 2002 .

[3]  D. Megill Recommendations for Adjusting Weights for Zambia Post-Harvest Survey Data Series and Improving Estimation Methodology for Future Surveys , 2005 .

[4]  Andrew Dorward,et al.  A Policy Agenda for Pro-Poor Agricultural Growth , 2004 .

[5]  Mulat Demeke,et al.  Technology Adoption in the Presence of Constraints: The Case of Fertilizer Demand in Ethiopia , 2003 .

[6]  Barry M. Popkin,et al.  Modeling Food Consumption Decisions as a Two-Step Process , 1988 .

[7]  T. Schroeder,et al.  FACTORS AFFECTING ADOPTION OF IMPROVED MAIZE SEED AND FERTILISER IN NORTHERN TANZANIA , 1997 .

[8]  Y. Mundlak On the Pooling of Time Series and Cross Section Data , 1978 .

[9]  Aloyce R. Kaliba,et al.  Factors Affecting Adoption of Improved Maize Seeds and Use of Inorganic Fertilizer for Maize Production in the Intermediate and Lowland Zones of Tanzania , 2000, Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics.

[10]  J. G. Cragg Some Statistical Models for Limited Dependent Variables with Application to the Demand for Durable Goods , 1971 .

[11]  C. Lin,et al.  Attribute and Safety Perceptions in a Double-Hurdle Model of Shellfish Consumption , 1993 .

[12]  J. Pletcher The Politics of Liberalizing Zambia's Maize Markets , 2000 .

[13]  Andrew M. Jones A double‐hurdle model of cigarette consumption , 1989 .

[14]  A. Randall,et al.  Is Fertilizer a Public or Private Good in Africa? An Opinion Piece , 2002 .

[15]  A. Dorward,et al.  Evaluation of the 2006/7 Agricultural Input Supply Programme, Malawi: Interim Report , 2007 .

[16]  T. Jayne,et al.  Fertilizer market development: a comparative analysis of Ethiopia, Kenya, and Zambia , 2003 .

[17]  T. Abdoulaye,et al.  Stages and determinants of fertilizer use in semiarid African agriculture: the Niger experience , 2005 .

[18]  D. Green,et al.  FACTORS AFFECTING FERTILIZER ADOPTION IN LESS DEVELOPED COUNTRIES: AN APPLICATION OF MULTIVARIATE LOGISTIC ANALYSIS IN MALAŴI , 1993 .

[19]  Gary Chamberlain,et al.  Chapter 22 Panel data , 1984 .