Unintended consequences of farm input subsidies: women’s contraceptive usage and knock-on effects on children
Sub-Saharan Africa’s countries adopted farm input subsidies, with a twin goal of bolstering food security and reducing poverty. Many scholars evaluate the subsidies against these intended impacts, while ignoring the potential unintended consequences. In this paper, we take advantage of a rare combin...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of population research (Canberra, A.C.T.) A.C.T.), 2024-09, Vol.41 (3), p.19, Article 19 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | |
---|---|
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | 19 |
container_title | Journal of population research (Canberra, A.C.T.) |
container_volume | 41 |
creator | Mwale, Martin Limbikani Kamninga, Tony Mwenda |
description | Sub-Saharan Africa’s countries adopted farm input subsidies, with a twin goal of bolstering food security and reducing poverty. Many scholars evaluate the subsidies against these intended impacts, while ignoring the potential unintended consequences. In this paper, we take advantage of a rare combination of information on both contraceptive usage and a subsidy program, from Malawi’s 2020 multiple indicator cluster survey, to investigate whether Malawi’s farm input subsidy program (FISP) affected women’s contraceptive usage. Using the instrumental variables method, we find that women that lived in FISP households increased contraceptives usage. This is in line with the hypothesis that the women aimed to prevent pregnancy, and hence dedicate uninterrupted time to farming, complementing the FISP. More of women’s time in farming could imply less of their time in domestic chores. We, therefore, further investigated whether children, in the same households, increased participation in the domestic chores, to take up roles left by the farming women. We find that this is the case. These findings therefore highlight the importance of understanding both the intended and unintended consequences of welfare programmes to ensure that the impacts of such programmes are not over-or underestimated. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s12546-024-09337-y |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_3074237060</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>3074237060</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c200t-3b84cbe45073c3f6f48f8f2c5330404525b655738363d1b67df9796b91d6dcd03</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kMtOwzAQRSMEEqXwA6wssTY4GT8SdqjiJVViQ9dWYo9L-rCLnYC64zf4Pb6ElCKxYzWzOPeO5mTZec4uc8bUVcoLwSVlBaesAlB0e5CN8hIErbisDoedc6AF5-o4O0lpwZhQAtQoCzPf-g69RUtM8Alfe_QGEwmOuDquSes3fUdS36TWtpiuyXtYo__6-Ew7vou1wU3XviHpUz1HUntLlj6YJQ2eoHNouqHLE_PSrmxEf5oduXqV8Ox3jrPZ3e3z5IFOn-4fJzdTagrGOgpNyU2DXDAFBpx0vHSlK4wAYJxxUYhGCqGgBAk2b6SyrlKVbKrcSmssg3F2se_dxDC8lDq9CH30w0kNTPECFJM7qthTJoaUIjq9ie26jludM70Tq_di9SBW_4jV2yEE-1AaYD_H-Ff9T-obFIR-IA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3074237060</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Unintended consequences of farm input subsidies: women’s contraceptive usage and knock-on effects on children</title><source>Sociological Abstracts</source><source>Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals</source><creator>Mwale, Martin Limbikani ; Kamninga, Tony Mwenda</creator><creatorcontrib>Mwale, Martin Limbikani ; Kamninga, Tony Mwenda</creatorcontrib><description>Sub-Saharan Africa’s countries adopted farm input subsidies, with a twin goal of bolstering food security and reducing poverty. Many scholars evaluate the subsidies against these intended impacts, while ignoring the potential unintended consequences. In this paper, we take advantage of a rare combination of information on both contraceptive usage and a subsidy program, from Malawi’s 2020 multiple indicator cluster survey, to investigate whether Malawi’s farm input subsidy program (FISP) affected women’s contraceptive usage. Using the instrumental variables method, we find that women that lived in FISP households increased contraceptives usage. This is in line with the hypothesis that the women aimed to prevent pregnancy, and hence dedicate uninterrupted time to farming, complementing the FISP. More of women’s time in farming could imply less of their time in domestic chores. We, therefore, further investigated whether children, in the same households, increased participation in the domestic chores, to take up roles left by the farming women. We find that this is the case. These findings therefore highlight the importance of understanding both the intended and unintended consequences of welfare programmes to ensure that the impacts of such programmes are not over-or underestimated.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1443-2447</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1835-9469</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s12546-024-09337-y</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands</publisher><subject>Agricultural subsidies ; Agriculture ; Birth control ; Children ; Cluster analysis ; Contraceptives ; Demography ; Farming ; Farms ; Food security ; Households ; Original Research ; Poverty ; Pregnancy ; Social Sciences ; Sociology ; Subsidies ; Welfare ; Welfare services ; Women</subject><ispartof>Journal of population research (Canberra, A.C.T.), 2024-09, Vol.41 (3), p.19, Article 19</ispartof><rights>The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V. 2024. Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c200t-3b84cbe45073c3f6f48f8f2c5330404525b655738363d1b67df9796b91d6dcd03</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-7446-9192</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s12546-024-09337-y$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s12546-024-09337-y$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,27905,27906,33755,41469,42538,51300</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Mwale, Martin Limbikani</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kamninga, Tony Mwenda</creatorcontrib><title>Unintended consequences of farm input subsidies: women’s contraceptive usage and knock-on effects on children</title><title>Journal of population research (Canberra, A.C.T.)</title><addtitle>J Pop Research</addtitle><description>Sub-Saharan Africa’s countries adopted farm input subsidies, with a twin goal of bolstering food security and reducing poverty. Many scholars evaluate the subsidies against these intended impacts, while ignoring the potential unintended consequences. In this paper, we take advantage of a rare combination of information on both contraceptive usage and a subsidy program, from Malawi’s 2020 multiple indicator cluster survey, to investigate whether Malawi’s farm input subsidy program (FISP) affected women’s contraceptive usage. Using the instrumental variables method, we find that women that lived in FISP households increased contraceptives usage. This is in line with the hypothesis that the women aimed to prevent pregnancy, and hence dedicate uninterrupted time to farming, complementing the FISP. More of women’s time in farming could imply less of their time in domestic chores. We, therefore, further investigated whether children, in the same households, increased participation in the domestic chores, to take up roles left by the farming women. We find that this is the case. These findings therefore highlight the importance of understanding both the intended and unintended consequences of welfare programmes to ensure that the impacts of such programmes are not over-or underestimated.</description><subject>Agricultural subsidies</subject><subject>Agriculture</subject><subject>Birth control</subject><subject>Children</subject><subject>Cluster analysis</subject><subject>Contraceptives</subject><subject>Demography</subject><subject>Farming</subject><subject>Farms</subject><subject>Food security</subject><subject>Households</subject><subject>Original Research</subject><subject>Poverty</subject><subject>Pregnancy</subject><subject>Social Sciences</subject><subject>Sociology</subject><subject>Subsidies</subject><subject>Welfare</subject><subject>Welfare services</subject><subject>Women</subject><issn>1443-2447</issn><issn>1835-9469</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>BHHNA</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kMtOwzAQRSMEEqXwA6wssTY4GT8SdqjiJVViQ9dWYo9L-rCLnYC64zf4Pb6ElCKxYzWzOPeO5mTZec4uc8bUVcoLwSVlBaesAlB0e5CN8hIErbisDoedc6AF5-o4O0lpwZhQAtQoCzPf-g69RUtM8Alfe_QGEwmOuDquSes3fUdS36TWtpiuyXtYo__6-Ew7vou1wU3XviHpUz1HUntLlj6YJQ2eoHNouqHLE_PSrmxEf5oduXqV8Ox3jrPZ3e3z5IFOn-4fJzdTagrGOgpNyU2DXDAFBpx0vHSlK4wAYJxxUYhGCqGgBAk2b6SyrlKVbKrcSmssg3F2se_dxDC8lDq9CH30w0kNTPECFJM7qthTJoaUIjq9ie26jludM70Tq_di9SBW_4jV2yEE-1AaYD_H-Ff9T-obFIR-IA</recordid><startdate>20240901</startdate><enddate>20240901</enddate><creator>Mwale, Martin Limbikani</creator><creator>Kamninga, Tony Mwenda</creator><general>Springer Netherlands</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7U3</scope><scope>7U4</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>BHHNA</scope><scope>DWI</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>WZK</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7446-9192</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20240901</creationdate><title>Unintended consequences of farm input subsidies: women’s contraceptive usage and knock-on effects on children</title><author>Mwale, Martin Limbikani ; Kamninga, Tony Mwenda</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c200t-3b84cbe45073c3f6f48f8f2c5330404525b655738363d1b67df9796b91d6dcd03</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Agricultural subsidies</topic><topic>Agriculture</topic><topic>Birth control</topic><topic>Children</topic><topic>Cluster analysis</topic><topic>Contraceptives</topic><topic>Demography</topic><topic>Farming</topic><topic>Farms</topic><topic>Food security</topic><topic>Households</topic><topic>Original Research</topic><topic>Poverty</topic><topic>Pregnancy</topic><topic>Social Sciences</topic><topic>Sociology</topic><topic>Subsidies</topic><topic>Welfare</topic><topic>Welfare services</topic><topic>Women</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Mwale, Martin Limbikani</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kamninga, Tony Mwenda</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Social Services Abstracts</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (pre-2017)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (Ovid)</collection><jtitle>Journal of population research (Canberra, A.C.T.)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Mwale, Martin Limbikani</au><au>Kamninga, Tony Mwenda</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Unintended consequences of farm input subsidies: women’s contraceptive usage and knock-on effects on children</atitle><jtitle>Journal of population research (Canberra, A.C.T.)</jtitle><stitle>J Pop Research</stitle><date>2024-09-01</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>41</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>19</spage><pages>19-</pages><artnum>19</artnum><issn>1443-2447</issn><eissn>1835-9469</eissn><abstract>Sub-Saharan Africa’s countries adopted farm input subsidies, with a twin goal of bolstering food security and reducing poverty. Many scholars evaluate the subsidies against these intended impacts, while ignoring the potential unintended consequences. In this paper, we take advantage of a rare combination of information on both contraceptive usage and a subsidy program, from Malawi’s 2020 multiple indicator cluster survey, to investigate whether Malawi’s farm input subsidy program (FISP) affected women’s contraceptive usage. Using the instrumental variables method, we find that women that lived in FISP households increased contraceptives usage. This is in line with the hypothesis that the women aimed to prevent pregnancy, and hence dedicate uninterrupted time to farming, complementing the FISP. More of women’s time in farming could imply less of their time in domestic chores. We, therefore, further investigated whether children, in the same households, increased participation in the domestic chores, to take up roles left by the farming women. We find that this is the case. These findings therefore highlight the importance of understanding both the intended and unintended consequences of welfare programmes to ensure that the impacts of such programmes are not over-or underestimated.</abstract><cop>Dordrecht</cop><pub>Springer Netherlands</pub><doi>10.1007/s12546-024-09337-y</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7446-9192</orcidid></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1443-2447 |
ispartof | Journal of population research (Canberra, A.C.T.), 2024-09, Vol.41 (3), p.19, Article 19 |
issn | 1443-2447 1835-9469 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_3074237060 |
source | Sociological Abstracts; Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals |
subjects | Agricultural subsidies Agriculture Birth control Children Cluster analysis Contraceptives Demography Farming Farms Food security Households Original Research Poverty Pregnancy Social Sciences Sociology Subsidies Welfare Welfare services Women |
title | Unintended consequences of farm input subsidies: women’s contraceptive usage and knock-on effects on children |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-20T13%3A20%3A36IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Unintended%20consequences%20of%20farm%20input%20subsidies:%20women%E2%80%99s%20contraceptive%20usage%20and%20knock-on%20effects%20on%20children&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20population%20research%20(Canberra,%20A.C.T.)&rft.au=Mwale,%20Martin%20Limbikani&rft.date=2024-09-01&rft.volume=41&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=19&rft.pages=19-&rft.artnum=19&rft.issn=1443-2447&rft.eissn=1835-9469&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s12546-024-09337-y&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3074237060%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3074237060&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |