Differentiating the consumer benefits from labeling of GM food products

Although recurrent evidence is found that consumers have different willingness to pay for GM and non-GM products, there is disagreement in the scientific community about the size of consumer benefits from GM labeling. In this article we use a theoretical model based on a standard constant elasticity of substitution (CES) to explain the importance of the quality effect. It is shown that failing to consider the quality effect may yield an overestimation of benefits from GM labeling, voluntary or mandatory.     

Does land registration and certification boost farm productivity? Evidence from Ethiopia

According to economic theory, tenure security is an important determinant of agricultural investment and productivity. Land titling has been at the center stage of development efforts of many African countries to boost tenure security. We investigate the productivity impacts of the Ethiopian land registration and certification program, employing propensity score matching method in an effort to create a credible counterfactual. Consistent with theory, we find land registration and certification has robust positive effects on farm productivity. More tentatively, we identify the assurance effect as one probable channel for impact. Households with land certificates are more likely to adopt soil‐fertility management strategies on their plots than households without certificates.     

Do input subsidy programs “crowd in” or “crowd out” commercial market development? Modeling fertilizer demand in a two‐channel marketing system

Many governments in developing countries distribute fertilizer at subsidized prices in an effort to stimulate small farmers' agricultural productivity and food security. Prior fertilizer demand studies have largely failed to account for the effects of government programs on farmers' commercial purchases. Using a double hurdle model and nationally representative rural household panel data in Zambia, we distinguish between these sources and measure the contemporaneous \"crowding in\" and \"crowding out\" effects of government input programs on commercial fertilizer sales. Where the private sector is relatively active and average wealth is higher (areas seemingly more likely to be targeted by government programs), results indicate that subsidies have substantially crowded out the private sector, in some cases to the point that such programs could actually lower overall fertilizer use. On the other hand, in poorer areas where the private sector is relatively inactive, subsidies help to generate demand and crowd in private sector retailers. Empirical studies explicitly modeling farmers' fertilizer purchase behavior within a dual marketing framework can provide important insights for agricultural policy discussions in developing countries.     

Why does on-farm storage fail to mitigate price volatility?

We analyze the role of farm stock management on price volatility under liquidity constraints and heterogeneous price expectations. In commodity markets, speculative behaviors by stockholders tend to reduce price volatility, but this is not the case in certain agricultural markets, where speculation by farmers regarding decisions to sell or store grain is subject to liquidity constraints and heterogeneous price expectations. Like stockholders, most farmers sell grain if they expect a price drop in the near future, but unlike stockholders, they are not necessarily able to purchase grain if they expect a price increase in the next period. Heterogeneous price expectations can also lead to suboptimal storage decisions, further increasing price volatility. For these reasons, the storage management behavior of farmers often fails to mitigate price drops in the way that speculation by stockholders does. We merge historical data on maize prices and household storage collected in Burkina Faso in order to build a dynamic panel over the 2005–2012 period. We show that carryover from one season to the next is associated with unexpected price drops during the preceding lean season and that carryover is associated with more frequent unexpected price drops following the subsequent post‐harvest season.