564
beneficiaries continue cultivating on degraded soils reduces enduring effects of the
program and locks farmers into low maize response rates to fertilizer use. The incremental impact of the program is low, and the situation is worsened because of frequent dry spells. Addressing soil fertility and drought-resilience issues through
adoption of integration of inorganic and organic fertilizer is potentially a magic
bullet to increase maize–fertilizer response and achieve sustainable maize productivity gains from FISP. Nonetheless, achieving integration on farmer-managed plots
is unlikely because policy instruments promoting access to and use of inorganic and
organic fertilizer are not firmly harmonized. The chapter recommends synchronization of policy tools by conditioning access to FISP on adoption of CSA technologies
such as organic fertilizer. Strategically, the harmonization should involve investment in agronomic research and agricultural extension services and transformation
of FISP implementation strategy. This approach can provide the Government of
Malawi with an opportunity for a sustainable exit strategy from FISP. Although the
evidence in this chapter can be applicable in other countries in SSA, a comprehensive review comparing findings from many countries could be more appropriate for
more evidence.
Acknowledgements I would like to acknowledge the valuable comments and suggestions from
Prof. Stein Holden and Ms. Sarah Tione of the Norwegian University of Life Sciences and Mr.
Osborne Tsoka from Malawi’s Ministry of Agriculture, Irrigation and Water Development. I also
sincerely thank the anonymous referee for the valuable comments on an earlier draft. Last but not
least, I acknowledge the support from the Norwegian Programme for Capacity Development in
Higher Education and Research for Development (NORHED)-Capacity Building for Climate
Smart Natural Resource Management and Policy (CLISNARP) project for supporting the production of this chapter.
References
Arndt C, Pauw K, Thurlow J (2015) The economy-wide impacts and risks of Malawi’s farm input
subsidy program. Am J Agric Econ 98:962–980
Barrett CB, Christiaensen L, Sheahan M, Shimeles A (2017) On the structural transformation of
rural Africa. J Afr Econ 26:i11–i35
Branca G, McCarthy N, Lipper L, Jolejole MC (2011) Climate-smart agriculture: a synthesis of
empirical evidence of food security and mitigation benefits from improved cropland management. In: Mitigation of Climate Change in Agriculture. Food and Agriculture Organisation,
Rome
Carr S (1997) A green revolution frustrated: lessons from the Malawi experience. Afr Crop Sci J
5:93–98
Carr S (2014) The challenge of Africa s nitrogen drought: some indicators from the Malawian
experience. International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, DC
Centre for Development Management (2017) Evaluation of the 2016/2017 Farm Input Subsidy
Programme (FISP). Ministry of Agriculture, Irrigation and Water Development, Lilongwe
Chabvunguma S, Munthali G (2008) Determination of maize planting dates using some meteorological factors-Case Study Chitipa. Proceedings of the 8th National Research Council of
Malawi Conference, 11–13 2008
S. P. Katengeza
beneficiaries continue cultivating on degraded soils reduces enduring effects of the
program and locks farmers into low maize response rates to fertilizer use. The incremental impact of the program is low, and the situation is worsened because of frequent dry spells. Addressing soil fertility and drought-resilience issues through
adoption of integration of inorganic and organic fertilizer is potentially a magic
bullet to increase maize–fertilizer response and achieve sustainable maize productivity gains from FISP. Nonetheless, achieving integration on farmer-managed plots
is unlikely because policy instruments promoting access to and use of inorganic and
organic fertilizer are not firmly harmonized. The chapter recommends synchronization of policy tools by conditioning access to FISP on adoption of CSA technologies
such as organic fertilizer. Strategically, the harmonization should involve investment in agronomic research and agricultural extension services and transformation
of FISP implementation strategy. This approach can provide the Government of
Malawi with an opportunity for a sustainable exit strategy from FISP. Although the
evidence in this chapter can be applicable in other countries in SSA, a comprehensive review comparing findings from many countries could be more appropriate for
more evidence.
Acknowledgements I would like to acknowledge the valuable comments and suggestions from
Prof. Stein Holden and Ms. Sarah Tione of the Norwegian University of Life Sciences and Mr.
Osborne Tsoka from Malawi’s Ministry of Agriculture, Irrigation and Water Development. I also
sincerely thank the anonymous referee for the valuable comments on an earlier draft. Last but not
least, I acknowledge the support from the Norwegian Programme for Capacity Development in
Higher Education and Research for Development (NORHED)-Capacity Building for Climate
Smart Natural Resource Management and Policy (CLISNARP) project for supporting the production of this chapter.
References
Arndt C, Pauw K, Thurlow J (2015) The economy-wide impacts and risks of Malawi’s farm input
subsidy program. Am J Agric Econ 98:962–980
Barrett CB, Christiaensen L, Sheahan M, Shimeles A (2017) On the structural transformation of
rural Africa. J Afr Econ 26:i11–i35
Branca G, McCarthy N, Lipper L, Jolejole MC (2011) Climate-smart agriculture: a synthesis of
empirical evidence of food security and mitigation benefits from improved cropland management. In: Mitigation of Climate Change in Agriculture. Food and Agriculture Organisation,
Rome
Carr S (1997) A green revolution frustrated: lessons from the Malawi experience. Afr Crop Sci J
5:93–98
Carr S (2014) The challenge of Africa s nitrogen drought: some indicators from the Malawian
experience. International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, DC
Centre for Development Management (2017) Evaluation of the 2016/2017 Farm Input Subsidy
Programme (FISP). Ministry of Agriculture, Irrigation and Water Development, Lilongwe
Chabvunguma S, Munthali G (2008) Determination of maize planting dates using some meteorological factors-Case Study Chitipa. Proceedings of the 8th National Research Council of
Malawi Conference, 11–13 2008
S. P. Katengeza