{"title":"Evaluating large-scale government investments in fertilizer adoption: The Ethiopian experience","authors":"Thomas Assefa, Ellen McCullough, Guush Berhane","doi":"10.1111/ajae.70007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>We evaluate the impact of a large Government of Ethiopia intervention to raise fertilizer supply by establishing five fertilizer blending facilities supplying fertilizers tailored to local soil nutrient profiles. We rely on the phased geographic rollout of blending facility establishment to identify the causal effect on fertilizer use, application rates, crop yields, gross crop revenue, and household consumption. Combining effects of multiple treatment periods, each estimated using a doubly robust difference-in-difference model, we find that the blending facilities increased the probability that farmers adopt the new blended fertilizers by 22 percentage points and increased application rates by 17 kg/ha (baseline adoption was zero). The facilities mostly induced farmers who previously used DAP to switch to NPS, and we find large decreases in DAP adoption (by 22 percentage points, 47% of the control group base mean) and application rates (16 kg/ha, 52% of the control group base mean) yet no impact on overall fertilizer adoption or application rates. Though the new blended fertilizers were expected to perform better, there is no evidence they improved crop yields, crop gross revenue, or household consumption. The effect of the intervention was more pronounced (with larger increases in NPS use and larger decreases in DAP use) for farms located near demonstration plots, which the Government used to train farmers about the agronomic response to the new fertilizers. We confirm results using three large-scale longitudinal datasets and show that they are robust to choices of specification, treatment definition, and inference assumptions.</p>","PeriodicalId":55537,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Agricultural Economics","volume":"108 3","pages":"874-900"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-04-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/ajae.70007","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Agricultural Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ajae.70007","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/7/31 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
We evaluate the impact of a large Government of Ethiopia intervention to raise fertilizer supply by establishing five fertilizer blending facilities supplying fertilizers tailored to local soil nutrient profiles. We rely on the phased geographic rollout of blending facility establishment to identify the causal effect on fertilizer use, application rates, crop yields, gross crop revenue, and household consumption. Combining effects of multiple treatment periods, each estimated using a doubly robust difference-in-difference model, we find that the blending facilities increased the probability that farmers adopt the new blended fertilizers by 22 percentage points and increased application rates by 17 kg/ha (baseline adoption was zero). The facilities mostly induced farmers who previously used DAP to switch to NPS, and we find large decreases in DAP adoption (by 22 percentage points, 47% of the control group base mean) and application rates (16 kg/ha, 52% of the control group base mean) yet no impact on overall fertilizer adoption or application rates. Though the new blended fertilizers were expected to perform better, there is no evidence they improved crop yields, crop gross revenue, or household consumption. The effect of the intervention was more pronounced (with larger increases in NPS use and larger decreases in DAP use) for farms located near demonstration plots, which the Government used to train farmers about the agronomic response to the new fertilizers. We confirm results using three large-scale longitudinal datasets and show that they are robust to choices of specification, treatment definition, and inference assumptions.
期刊介绍:
The American Journal of Agricultural Economics provides a forum for creative and scholarly work on the economics of agriculture and food, natural resources and the environment, and rural and community development throughout the world. Papers should relate to one of these areas, should have a problem orientation, and should demonstrate originality and innovation in analysis, methods, or application. Analyses of problems pertinent to research, extension, and teaching are equally encouraged, as is interdisciplinary research with a significant economic component. Review articles that offer a comprehensive and insightful survey of a relevant subject, consistent with the scope of the Journal as discussed above, will also be considered. All articles published, regardless of their nature, will be held to the same set of scholarly standards.