Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

On the Determinants of Low Productivity in Maize Farming in Uganda: The Role of Markets, Fertilizer Use and Gender

  • Chapter
In Pursuit of an African Green Revolution

Part of the book series: Natural Resource Management and Policy ((NRMP,volume 48))

Abstract

African governments and international development groups see boosting productivity on smallholder farm s as a key way to reduce rural poverty and safeguard the food security of non-farming households. Prompting smallholder farmers to use more fertilizer has been a key tactic. Closing the productivity gap between male and female farmers has been another avenue toward achieving the same goal. Our results suggest the two are related. We find that fertilizer use and maize yield s among smallholder farmers in Uganda are increased by improved access to markets and extension service s, and reduced by ex-ante risk-mitigating production decisions. However, we find that the gender productivity gap, significant in OLS regression results, disappears when gender is included in a list of determinants meant to capture the indirect effects of market and extension access. Consistent with observed risk mitigation production choices, the research confirms the important consequences of unexpected weather outcomes on yields.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    A partial list of organizations promoting smallholder productivity gains as a pathway for rural development includes the World Bank, FAO, IFPRI, AGRA and the Gates Foundation.

  2. 2.

    See Wooldridge (2002, p. 236) and Angrist and Pischke (2009, p. 190).

  3. 3.

    See Antle (1983) and related discussion in Larson et al. (2014a, b).

  4. 4.

    The estimated parameters themselves are reported in Appendix (Table 8.5).

  5. 5.

    See Larson et al. (2014a, b) for a related discussion.

References

  • Akresh R (2005) Understanding Pareto inefficient intrahousehold allocations. IZA Discussion Paper No. 1858. Institute for the Study of Labor, Bonn

    Google Scholar 

  • Alene AD, Manyong VM, Omanya GO, Mignouna HD, Bokanga M, Odhiambo GD (2008) Economic efficiency and supply response of women as farm managers: comparative evidence from Western Kenya. World Dev 36(7):1247–1260

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Angrist JD, Pischke J-S (2009) Mostly harmless econometrics: an empiricist’s companion. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Antle JM (1983) Sequential decision making in production models. Am J Agric Econ 65(2):282–290

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baum CF, Schaffer ME, Stillman S (2007) Enhanced routines for instrumental variables/generalized method of moments estimation and testing. Stata J 7(4):465–506

    Google Scholar 

  • Beegle K, Carletto C, Himelein K (2012) Reliability of recall in agricultural data. J Dev Econ 98(1):34–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bezabih M, Sarr M (2012) Risk preferences and environmental uncertainty: implications for crop diversification decisions in Ethiopia. Environ Resour Econ 53(4):483–505

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Binswanger HP, McIntire J (1987) Behavioral and material determinants of production relations in land-abundant tropical agriculture. Econ Dev Cult Change 36(1):73–99

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Binswanger HP, Pingali P (1989) Technological priorities for farming in sub-Saharan Africa. J Int Dev 1(1):46–65

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Binswanger-Mkhize HP, Savastano S (2014) Agricultural intensification: the status in six African countries, vol 7116, World Bank policy research working paper. World Bank, Washington, DC

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Birthal PS, Joshi PK, Gulati A (2005) Vertical coordination in high-value food commodities: implications for smallholders. MTID discussion paper 85. International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Boserup E (1965) The conditions of agricultural growth: the economics of agrarian change under population pressure. Allen and Unwin, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Brinkhoff T (2014) City population. Available on at www.citypopulation.de

  • Carter MR, Lybbert TJ (2012) Consumption versus asset smoothing: testing the implications of poverty trap theory in Burkina Faso. J Dev Econ 99(2):255–264

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carter MR, Little PD, Mogues T, Negatu W (2007) Poverty traps and natural disasters in Ethiopia and Honduras. World Dev 35(5):835–856

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Croppenstedt A, Demeke M, Meschi MM (2003) Technology adoption in the presence of constraints: the case of fertilizer demand in Ethiopia. Rev Dev Econ 7(1):58–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cuevas CE, Graham DH (1986) Rationing agricultural credit in developing countries: the role and determinants of transaction costs for borrowers. In: Maunder A, Renborg U (eds) Agriculture in a turbulent world economy: proceeding of the nineteenth international conference of agricultural economists. Grower Publishers, Brookfield

    Google Scholar 

  • Dercon S (2004) Growth and shocks: evidence from rural Ethiopia. J Dev Econ 74(2):309–329

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dercon S, Christiaensen L (2011) Consumption risk, technology adoption and poverty traps: evidence from Ethiopia. J Dev Econ 96(2):159–173

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dercon S, Hoddinott J, Woldehanna T (2005) Shocks and consumption in 15 Ethiopian villages, 1999–2004. J Afr Econ 14(4):559–585

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dorosh P, Wang HG, You L, Schmidt E (2012) Road connectivity, population, and crop production in sub-Saharan Africa. Agric Econ 43(1):89–103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feder G (1985) The relation between farm size and farm productivity: the role of family labor, supervision and credit constraints. J Dev Econ 18(2/3):297–313

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher M, Kandiwa V (2014) Can agricultural input subsidies reduce the gender gap in modern maize adoption? Evidence from Malawi. Food Policy 45:101–111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert RA, Sakala WD, Benson TD (2002) Gender analysis of a nationwide cropping system trial survey in Malawi. Afr Stud Q 6(1/2):223–243

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldstein M, Udry C (2008) The profits of power: land rights and agricultural investment in Ghana. J Pol Econ 116(6):981–1022

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayami Y (2001) Ecology, history, and development: a perspective from rural Southeast Asia. World Bank Res Obs 16(2):169–198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayami Y, Ruttan VW (1985) Agricultural development: an international perspective. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore

    Google Scholar 

  • Headey D, Dereje M, Ricker-Gilbert J, Josephson A, Taffesse AS (2013) Land constraints and agricultural intensification in Ethiopia: a village-level analysis of high-potential areas. IFPRI discussion paper 01290. International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill RV, Vigneri M (2014) Mainstreaming gender sensitivity in cash crop market supply chains. In: Qusumbing AR, Meinzen-Dick R, Raney TL, Croppenstedt A, Behrman JA, Peterman A (eds) Gender in agriculture: closing the knowledge gap. Springer, Dordrecht

    Google Scholar 

  • Hobbs JE (1997) Measuring the importance of transaction costs in cattle marketing. Am J Agric Econ 79(4):1083–1095

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoddinott J (2006) Shocks and their consequences across and within households in rural Zimbabwe. J Dev Stud 42(2):301–321

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoddinott J, Kinsey B (2001) Child growth in the time of drought. Oxf Bull Econ Stat 63(4):409–436

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holloway G, Nicholson C, Delgado C, Staal S, Ehui S (2000) Agroindustrialization through institutional innovation transaction costs, cooperatives and milk-market development in the East-African highlands. Agric Econ 23(3):279–288

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen R (2007) The digital provide: information (technology), market performance, and welfare in the South Indian fisheries sector. Q J Econ 122(3):879–924

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kazianga H, Udry C (2006) Consumption smoothing? Livestock, insurance and drought in rural Burkina Faso. J Dev Econ 79(2):413–446

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Key N, Sadoulet E, de Janvry A (2000) Transaction costs and agricultural household supply response. Am J Agric Econ 82(2):245–259

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kilic T, Palacios- López A, Goldstein M (2015) Caught in a productivity trap: a distributional perspective on gender differences in Malawian agriculture. World Development, forthcoming

    Google Scholar 

  • Kurukulasuriya P, Mendelsohn R (2007) Crop selection: adapting to climate change in Africa, vol 4307, World Bank policy research working paper. World Bank, Washington, DC

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Larson DF, Plessmann F (2009) Do farmers choose to be inefficient? Evidence from Bicol. J Dev Econ 90(1):24–32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larson DF, Anderson JR, Varangis P (2004) Policies on managing risk in agricultural markets. World Bank Res Obs 19(2):199–230

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larson DF, Lampietti J, Gouel C, Cafiero C, Roberts J (2014a) Food security and storage in the Middle East and North Africa. World Bank Econ Rev 28(1):48–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larson DF, Ostuka K, Matsumoto T, Kilic T (2014b) Should African rural development strategies depend on smallholder farms? An exploration of the inverse-productivity hypothesis. Agric Econ 45(3):355–367

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lipton M, Lipton M (1993) Creating rural livelihoods: some lessons for South Africa from experience elsewhere. World Dev 21(9):1515–1548

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lowder SK, Skoet J, Singh S (2014) What do we really know about the number and distribution of farms and family farms in the world? ESA working paper No. 14-02. Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome

    Google Scholar 

  • Maddison D (2007) The perception of and adaptation to climate change in Africa. Policy research working paper 4308. World Bank, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Minten B, Koru B, Stifel D (2013) The last mile(s) in modern input distribution: pricing, profitability, and adoption. Agric Econ 44(6):629–646

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morduch J (1995) Income smoothing and consumption smoothing. J Econ Perspect 9(3):103–114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morduch J (2005) Consumption smoothing across space: testing theories of risk-sharing in the ICRISAT study region of South India. In: Dercon S (ed) Insurance against poverty. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Morrison BM (1980) Rural household livelihood strategies in a Sri Lankan village. J Dev Stud 16(4):443–462

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mundlak Y, Butzer R, Larson DF (2012) Heterogeneous technology and panel data: the case of the agricultural production function. J Dev Econ 99(1):139–149

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Myint H (1971) Economic theory and the underdeveloped countries. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Nhemachena C, Hassan RM (2007) Micro-level analysis of farmers’ adaptation to climate change in Southern Africa. IFPRI discussion paper No 714. International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Norman DW (1978) Farming systems research to improve the livelihood of small farmers. Am J Agric Econ 60(5):813–818

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oladeebo JO, Fajuyigbe AA (2007) Technical efficiency of men and women upland rice farmers in Osun State, Nigeria. J Hum Ecol 22(2):93–100

    Google Scholar 

  • Otsuka K, Larson DF (2013b) An African Green Revolution: finding ways to boost productivity on small farms. Springer, Dordrecht

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Palacios-Lopez A, Lopez R (2014) Gender differences in agricultural productivity: the role of market imperfections, AREC Working paper 164061. University of Maryland, College Park

    Google Scholar 

  • Peterman A, Quisumbing A, Behrman J, Nkonya E (2011) Understanding the complexities surrounding gender differences in agricultural productivity in Nigeria and Uganda. J Dev Stud 47(10):1482–1509

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pingali P, Bigot Y, Binswanger HP (1987) Agricultural mechanization and the evolution of farming systems in sub-Saharan Africa. Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore

    Google Scholar 

  • Quisumbing A, Payongayong E, Aidoo JB, Otsuka K (2001) Women’s land rights in the transition to individualized ownership: implications for the tree-resource management in western Ghana. Econ Dev Cult Change 50(1):157–182

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenzweig MR, Binswanger HP (1993) Wealth, weather risk and the composition and profitability of agricultural investments. Econ J 103(416):56–78

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saito KA, Mekonnen H, Spurling D (1994) Raising the productivity of women farmers in sub-Saharan Africa, Africa technical department discussion paper Series 230. World Bank, Washington, DC

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sheahan M, Barrett C (2014) Understanding the agricultural input landscape in sub-Saharan Africa: recent plot, household, and community-level evidence, vol 7014, World Bank policy research working paper. World Bank, Washington, DC

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Shiferaw BA, Kebede TA, You L (2008) Technology adoption under seed access constraints and the economic impacts of improved pigeonpea varieties in Tanzania. Agric Econ 39(3):309–323

    Google Scholar 

  • Skees J, Varangis P, Larson D, Siegel P (2005) Can financial markets be tapped to help poor people cope with weather risks? In: Dercon S (ed) Insurance against poverty. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Smale M, Hartell J, Heisey PW, Senauer B (1998) The contribution of genetic resources and diversity to wheat production in the Punjab of Pakistan. Am J Agric Econ 80(3):482–493

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Staal S, Delgado C, Nicholson C (1997) Smallholder dairying under transaction costs in East Africa. World Dev 25(5):779–794

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stock JH, Yogo M (2005) Testing for weak instruments in linear IV regression. In: Andrews DWK, Stock JH (eds) Identification and inference for econometric models: essays in honor of Thomas Rothenberg. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Tiruneh A, Tesfaye T, Mwangi WM, Verkuijl H (2001) Gender differentials in agricultural production and decision-making among smallholders in Ada, Lume, and Gimbichu Woredas of the central highlands of Ethiopia. International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT), Mexico

    Google Scholar 

  • Udry C (1996) Gender, agricultural production, and the theory of the household. J Polit Econ 104(5):1010–1046

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • USGS FEWS Net (2014) Available at chg.geog.ucsb.eu/tools/geowri/index.html

  • Wooldridge J (2002) Econometric analysis of cross section and panel data. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • World Bank (2014) The Living Standards Measurement Study-Integrated Surveys on Agriculture (LSMS-ISA). World Bank, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Yamano T, Otsuka K, Place F (2011) Emerging development of agriculture in East Africa: markets, soil, and innovations. Springer, New York/Heidelberg

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Yorobe JM, Smale M (2012) Impacts of Bt maize on smallholder income in the Philippines. AgBioForum 15(2):152–162

    Google Scholar 

  • Zerfu D, Larson DF (2010) Incomplete markets and fertilizer use: evidence from Ethiopia, vol 5235, World Bank policy research working paper. World Bank, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Development Research Group, World Bank, Washington, DC, USA

    Donald F. Larson, Siobhan Murray & Amparo Palacios-López

  2. Department of Economics and Finance, University of Rome Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy

    Sara Savastano

Authors
  1. Donald F. Larson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sara Savastano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Siobhan Murray
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Amparo Palacios-López
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Donald F. Larson .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies, Tokyo, Japan

    Keijiro Otsuka

  2. Development Research Group, World Bank, Washington, District of Columbia, USA

    Donald F. Larson

Appendix

Appendix

Table 8.5 Estimated coefficients used to evaluate the elasticities reported in Table 8.3
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 The Editor(s) and the Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Larson, D.F., Savastano, S., Murray, S., Palacios-López, A. (2016). On the Determinants of Low Productivity in Maize Farming in Uganda: The Role of Markets, Fertilizer Use and Gender. In: Otsuka, K., Larson, D. (eds) In Pursuit of an African Green Revolution. Natural Resource Management and Policy, vol 48. Springer, Tokyo. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-4-431-55693-0_8

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation