Kelvin Mulungu , Dale T. Manning , Martina Bozzola
{"title":"Once bitten, twice shy? Direct and indirect effects of weather shocks on fertilizer and improved seeds use","authors":"Kelvin Mulungu , Dale T. Manning , Martina Bozzola","doi":"10.1016/j.foodpol.2025.102852","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Evidence suggests that negative weather shocks, such as droughts, can influence input use in agriculture by reducing available income and shaping farmers’ behavioral responses. Yet, the relative importance of these two pathways remains unclear. This study proposes a method to disentangle the direct (behavioral) and indirect (income) effects of a drought shock on the use of inorganic fertilizer and improved maize seed. We employed a two-way fixed-effects regression combined with causal mediation analysis and entropy balancing to account for income endogeneity on a rich farm-level data from 6058 smallholder households in Zambia in 2012 and 2015. Our results show that farmers who experienced a drought in the previous growing season are less likely to use inorganic fertilizer but more likely to use improved seeds. The indirect income effect accounts for approximately 10% of the total effect for both inputs, amplifying the direct effect for inorganic fertilizer while diminishing it for improved seeds. The contribution of the indirect effect increases with the severity of drought shocks, although the direct effect remains the dominant channel. We also provide suggestive evidence that changes in risk aversion drive behavioral responses, while access to credit mitigates the income effect. These results highlight how drought shocks influence the timing and type of technology adopted in agriculture. Understanding the relative importance of these direct and indirect effects offers critical insights for policies aimed at enhancing climate change adaptation and agricultural productivity in the developing world.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":321,"journal":{"name":"Food Policy","volume":"133 ","pages":"Article 102852"},"PeriodicalIF":6.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Food Policy","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306919225000569","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Evidence suggests that negative weather shocks, such as droughts, can influence input use in agriculture by reducing available income and shaping farmers’ behavioral responses. Yet, the relative importance of these two pathways remains unclear. This study proposes a method to disentangle the direct (behavioral) and indirect (income) effects of a drought shock on the use of inorganic fertilizer and improved maize seed. We employed a two-way fixed-effects regression combined with causal mediation analysis and entropy balancing to account for income endogeneity on a rich farm-level data from 6058 smallholder households in Zambia in 2012 and 2015. Our results show that farmers who experienced a drought in the previous growing season are less likely to use inorganic fertilizer but more likely to use improved seeds. The indirect income effect accounts for approximately 10% of the total effect for both inputs, amplifying the direct effect for inorganic fertilizer while diminishing it for improved seeds. The contribution of the indirect effect increases with the severity of drought shocks, although the direct effect remains the dominant channel. We also provide suggestive evidence that changes in risk aversion drive behavioral responses, while access to credit mitigates the income effect. These results highlight how drought shocks influence the timing and type of technology adopted in agriculture. Understanding the relative importance of these direct and indirect effects offers critical insights for policies aimed at enhancing climate change adaptation and agricultural productivity in the developing world.
期刊介绍:
Food Policy is a multidisciplinary journal publishing original research and novel evidence on issues in the formulation, implementation, and evaluation of policies for the food sector in developing, transition, and advanced economies.
Our main focus is on the economic and social aspect of food policy, and we prioritize empirical studies informing international food policy debates. Provided that articles make a clear and explicit contribution to food policy debates of international interest, we consider papers from any of the social sciences. Papers from other disciplines (e.g., law) will be considered only if they provide a key policy contribution, and are written in a style which is accessible to a social science readership.