FERTILIZER SUBSIDY AND AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTIVITY IN BURKINA FASO Presented by: Doubahan Adeline...
-
Upload
joshua-warren -
Category
Documents
-
view
219 -
download
3
Transcript of FERTILIZER SUBSIDY AND AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTIVITY IN BURKINA FASO Presented by: Doubahan Adeline...
1
FERTILIZER SUBSIDY AND AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTIVITY IN BURKINA FASO
Presented by: Doubahan Adeline COULIBALY
2nd International Conference on Sustainable Development in Africa Dakar, Senégal, 26-27 November 2015
2
• INTRODUCTION
• OBJECTIVE
• THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
• EMPIRICAL FRAMEWORK
• RESULTS AND IMPLICATIONS
• CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
PLAN
3
Agriculture plays an important role in the development
process in both developed and developing countries
• labor tank for other sectors and a source of raw materials for
industry (Lewis, 1954; Hirschman, 1958)
Agriculture is also a source of growth
• In 2005, year in which growth of Burkina Faso was highest
(7.4%), the agricultural sector contributed about 4 points of
percentage
INTRODUCTION
4
in order to contribute in development process and growth,
agriculture must be productive. However, Burkina Faso
agriculture is characterized by low productivity
• According to the World Development Indicator (2013), cereal
yields in 2012 were only 1417kg / ha and 1230kg / ha
respectively in Sub-Saharan Africa and Burkina against
5922kg / ha, 5837kg / ha and 7524kg / ha respectively in the
United States, China and France.
INTRODUCTION
5
On cause of low productivity
• Lack of soil fertility management (average fertilizer application
between 2008 and 2010 was 9,42kg / ha (WDI 2013))
Given the importance of agriculture for Burkina Faso
economy and 2008 food crisis , the government of Burkina
Faso has set up fertilizer subsidy policy.
INTRODUCTION
6
Literature is divided about the impact of fertilizer subsidy on productivity
• According to price effect and income effect of the subsidy,
some studies show that fertilizer subsidy has a positive impact
on productivity (Carter et al., 2013 ; Chibwana et al. 2010)
• According to theory of decision under uncertainty and issues of
institution, other authors show that fertilizer subsidy has a
negative impact on productivity (Ricker-Gilbert et al., 2013 ;
Seck 2013)
INTRODUCTION
7
Observation: Debate is not determine
• It is then important to know: what is the impact of fertilizer
subsidy on agricultural productivity in Burkina Faso?
Objective: Evaluate the impact of Burkina Faso fertilizer
subsidy program on agricultural productivity
Hypothesis: fertilizer subsidy improves agricultural productivity
OBJECTIVE AND HYPOTHESIS
8
Method: Impact evaluation on
• simple production function
• Or stochastic
Objective of Impact evaluation :
• Determine the causal effect of treatment:
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
9
Fundamental problem of Impact evaluation :
• To determine the counterfactual,
• counterfactual represents on average that will be the
beneficiaries in the absence of the program
• For this research we use two types of counterfactual :
• First: producers who didn’t use fertilizer
• Second: producers who bought the fertilizer at the market
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
10
Beneficiaries versus producers who didn’t use fertilizer
• Productivity = yield
• Estimation method: Heckman
• With
EMPIRICAL FRAMEWORK
11
EMPIRICAL FRAMEWORK
12
Beneficiaries versus producers who bought the fertilizer at the market
• Productivity= Technical Efficiency
• Estimation method: Matching on technical efficiency score
EMPIRICAL FRAMEWORK
13
• For this study, we use 2012 Permanent Agricultural
Survey of Burkina Faso Ministry of Agriculture and
Food Security
• The information was collected in the 45 provinces of
Burkina Faso.
• Household sample is randomly selected
• After clearance of data base we have 1233 households
DATA
14
Beneficiaries versus producers who didn’t use fertilizer
RESULTATS ET IMPLICATIONS
Table 1 : probit Estimation for selection to the subsidy program
Variables Coefficients Robust Std. Err.
AGE -0,015*** 0,004
ACRED 0,475** 0,238
TSEM 1,019*** 0,183
SEXE -0,469* 0,253
CES -0,108 0,159
constant -0,218 0,337
Observations
Log pseudolikelihood
1155-143458,57
15
RESULTATS ET IMPLICATIONS
VariablesModel a Model b
Coef sdt Error Coef sdt Error
ANIT 0,347 1,053 0,327 1,05
FUM -7,04e-08 2,13e-06 -3,95e-08 2,13e-06
MOF 9,249*** 3,573 9,307*** 3,56
SEXE 132,448 101,261 347,80** 142,02
AGE -2,719* 1,478 4,861 3,808
TSEM 19,106 92,963 -439,582** 231,83
SUBV 500,424*** 68,485 487,65*** 68,63
Invmills - - -563,35*** 260,91
Cons 820,203*** 126,459 1312,049*** 260,45
Table 2 : Estimation of program impact on productivity .Shively and al. (2012)
16
Beneficiaries versus producers who bought the fertilizer at the market
Variables Coef sdt ErrorStochastic frontier model
lUREE 0,040 0,028lNPK -0,016 0,027lFUM 0,031* 0,018lANIT 0,017 0,033lHERB 0,053** 0,023lSUP 1,080*** 0,025lMOF -0,108 0,0401Cons 6,881*** 0,289
Model of ineffiencyAGE 0,013** 0,006SUBV 0,125 0,182MLAB -0,404*** 0,191NINS 0,539*** 0,165ACRED -0,159 0,229TSEM -0,173 0,201Cons tant -1,445** 0,385
Table3: Estimation of Cobb-Douglas stochastic production fonction
17
RESULTATS ET IMPLICATIONS
n.treat. n.contr ATT Std.Err. t.statistique
166 136 -0,027 0,015 -1,779
Table 4: estimation of the fertilizer subsidy program impact
Ricker-Gilbert and al. (2009)
18
The fertilizer subsidy program for maize has a positive impact
for beneficiaries but when we compare beneficiaries with
producers who bought fertilizer at the market, it appears that the
latter are more productive than beneficiaries.
we encourage government to continue fertilizer subsidy
program. But the program mechanism must be improved in
order to improve fertilizer subsidy effectiveness
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
19
THANK YOU!
20
FERTILIZER SUBSIDY AND AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTIVITY IN BURKINA FASO
Presented by: Doubahan Adeline COULIBALY
2nd International Conference on Sustainable Development in Africa Dakar, Senégal, 26-27 November 2015
21
The objective of the fertilizer subsidy program is to increase the level of the current use of NPK and urea.
The subsidy rate between 2008 and 2010 for the NPK was 12% and 26% for urea. The rate rose to 50% between 2011 and 2013 as well as for urea and NPK
In order to have access to subsidized fertilizer, farmers fill a form where they identify and provide information on crops and area that will be cultivate.
FERTILIZER SUBSIDY PROGRAM
22
Once the need for fertilizer is estimated, the ministry of agriculture imports fertilizer and delivered it directly to regional offices.
In many cases, the needs may be underestimated or overestimated. This leads to a misallocation of subsidized fertilizer and creates a surplus subsidized fertilizer in some provinces, while others are in deficit.
FERTILIZER SUBSIDY PROGRAM
23
From the above, it appears that participation to the fertilizer subsidy program suffers problem of self-selection. Farmers must support the transport cost from the regional office of ministry of agriculture to the village. In addition, they must pay cash the fertilizer subsidized. It follows that only households able to support these costs will have access to the subsidy.
FERTILIZER SUBSIDY PROGRAM