{"title":"农业投入补贴是否不利于采用病虫害综合防治?赞比亚的证据","authors":"Justice A. Tambo, Lenis Saweda O. Liverpool-Tasie","doi":"10.1111/1477-9552.12582","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Input subsidy programmes (ISPs) remain a popular but contentious policy tool to promote agricultural intensification, food security and poverty reduction across Africa. Although previous studies have explored the impact of ISPs on various smallholder outcomes, no studies have analysed the impact of recent ISPs on pest management. This is particularly important given the increasing pest challenges due to climate change and the recent surge in pesticide use in low-income countries and its associated negative consequences for human and environmental health. Thus, this study assessed the effects of ISPs on smallholder adoption of sustainable pest management practices, using data from 1048 smallholder maize plots across major maize-producing zones of Zambia and a control function regression approach. We find consistent evidence that input subsidy receipt is negatively associated with smallholders' adoption of environmentally friendly and sustainable pest management strategies. Participation in the Zambia ISP (particularly the flexible e-voucher system) encourages synthetic pesticide use, at the expense of sustainable practices. We also find that farmers consider synthetic pesticides and biopesticides as substitutes and are more likely to adopt sustainable pest management when they have tenure security and access to financial resources. Given the human and environmental health consequences associated with synthetic pesticide use, it would be important to leverage input subsidy schemes to promote the adoption of safer and more sustainable alternatives to synthetic pesticides. Beyond input subsidies, policies that improve tenure security and financial access for smallholders can promote the adoption of sustainable pest management practices.</p>","PeriodicalId":14994,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agricultural Economics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1477-9552.12582","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Are farm input subsidies a disincentive for integrated pest management adoption? Evidence from Zambia\",\"authors\":\"Justice A. Tambo, Lenis Saweda O. Liverpool-Tasie\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/1477-9552.12582\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Input subsidy programmes (ISPs) remain a popular but contentious policy tool to promote agricultural intensification, food security and poverty reduction across Africa. Although previous studies have explored the impact of ISPs on various smallholder outcomes, no studies have analysed the impact of recent ISPs on pest management. This is particularly important given the increasing pest challenges due to climate change and the recent surge in pesticide use in low-income countries and its associated negative consequences for human and environmental health. Thus, this study assessed the effects of ISPs on smallholder adoption of sustainable pest management practices, using data from 1048 smallholder maize plots across major maize-producing zones of Zambia and a control function regression approach. We find consistent evidence that input subsidy receipt is negatively associated with smallholders' adoption of environmentally friendly and sustainable pest management strategies. Participation in the Zambia ISP (particularly the flexible e-voucher system) encourages synthetic pesticide use, at the expense of sustainable practices. We also find that farmers consider synthetic pesticides and biopesticides as substitutes and are more likely to adopt sustainable pest management when they have tenure security and access to financial resources. Given the human and environmental health consequences associated with synthetic pesticide use, it would be important to leverage input subsidy schemes to promote the adoption of safer and more sustainable alternatives to synthetic pesticides. Beyond input subsidies, policies that improve tenure security and financial access for smallholders can promote the adoption of sustainable pest management practices.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14994,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Agricultural Economics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1477-9552.12582\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Agricultural Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1477-9552.12582\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Agricultural Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1477-9552.12582","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Are farm input subsidies a disincentive for integrated pest management adoption? Evidence from Zambia
Input subsidy programmes (ISPs) remain a popular but contentious policy tool to promote agricultural intensification, food security and poverty reduction across Africa. Although previous studies have explored the impact of ISPs on various smallholder outcomes, no studies have analysed the impact of recent ISPs on pest management. This is particularly important given the increasing pest challenges due to climate change and the recent surge in pesticide use in low-income countries and its associated negative consequences for human and environmental health. Thus, this study assessed the effects of ISPs on smallholder adoption of sustainable pest management practices, using data from 1048 smallholder maize plots across major maize-producing zones of Zambia and a control function regression approach. We find consistent evidence that input subsidy receipt is negatively associated with smallholders' adoption of environmentally friendly and sustainable pest management strategies. Participation in the Zambia ISP (particularly the flexible e-voucher system) encourages synthetic pesticide use, at the expense of sustainable practices. We also find that farmers consider synthetic pesticides and biopesticides as substitutes and are more likely to adopt sustainable pest management when they have tenure security and access to financial resources. Given the human and environmental health consequences associated with synthetic pesticide use, it would be important to leverage input subsidy schemes to promote the adoption of safer and more sustainable alternatives to synthetic pesticides. Beyond input subsidies, policies that improve tenure security and financial access for smallholders can promote the adoption of sustainable pest management practices.
期刊介绍:
Published on behalf of the Agricultural Economics Society, the Journal of Agricultural Economics is a leading international professional journal, providing a forum for research into agricultural economics and related disciplines such as statistics, marketing, business management, politics, history and sociology, and their application to issues in the agricultural, food, and related industries; rural communities, and the environment.
Each issue of the JAE contains articles, notes and book reviews as well as information relating to the Agricultural Economics Society. Published 3 times a year, it is received by members and institutional subscribers in 69 countries. With contributions from leading international scholars, the JAE is a leading citation for agricultural economics and policy. Published articles either deal with new developments in research and methods of analysis, or apply existing methods and techniques to new problems and situations which are of general interest to the Journal’s international readership.