4.6 Article

Does Fertilizer Education Program Increase the Technical Efficiency of Chemical Fertilizer Use? Evidence from Wheat Production in China

Journal

SUSTAINABILITY
Volume 11, Issue 2, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/su11020543

Keywords

technical efficiency of chemical fertilizer use; nutrient management; difference-in-difference (DID); stochastic frontier analysis (SFA); agricultural input efficiency; China

Funding

  1. National Social Science Fund of China [17AJY019]
  2. USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture Hatch project [101, 030]
  3. ISU Center for China-US Agricultural Economics and Policy

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Farmers in China and many other developing countries suffer from low technical efficiency of chemical fertilizer use, which leads to excessive nutrient runoff and other environmental problems. A major cause of the low efficiency is lack of science-based information and recommendations for nutrient application. In response, the Chinese government launched an ambitious nationwide program called the Soil Testing and Fertilizer Recommendation Project (STFRP) in 2005 to increase the efficiency of chemical fertilizer use. However, there has been no systematic evaluation of this program. Using data from a nationally representative household survey, and using wheat as an example, this paper first quantifies the technical efficiency of chemical fertilizer use (TEFU) by conducting stochastic frontier analysis (SFA), then evaluates the impact of STFRP on the TEFU using a generalized difference-in-difference approach. We found that STFRP, on average, increased TEFU in wheat production by about 4%, which was robust across various robustness checks. The lessons learned from STFRP will be valuable for China's future outreach efforts, as well as for other countries considering similar nutrient management policies.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available