Is seed aid distribution still justified in South Sudan?

• We analyze the targeting and impact of seed aid across the equatorial states of South Sudan. • Seed aid is widely distributed, favoring well-connected households over vulnerable, food insecure households. • The cultivation of relief seeds does not result in increased agricultural production through intensification or expansion. • Seed aid seems to substitute rather than supplement local seeds, hampering seed sector development in post-conflict settings. Seed aid—or free distribution of seeds to farmers—is a popular intervention to simultaneously reduce food insecurity and dependency on food aid in fragile countries. However, seed aid distribution also has the potential to hinder or distort the development of local seed markets. In this study we analyze the targeting and impact of seed aid across the green belt (cutting across the southern/equatorial states) of South Sudan. Using a primary and unique dataset on 1,990 farm households, we find that seed aid is widely rather than selectively distributed. Almost a third of farm households receive seed aid despite the general availability of locally recycled seed varieties. Seed aid distribution does not seem to favor particularly poor, vulnerable and food insecure households, but those that are embedded in community networks, organizations and institutions. Using a double robust methodology based on Inverse Probability Weighted Regression Adjustment (IPWRA), we also find that the adoption of seed aid by farm households does not result in increased maize production, as it is neither associated with agricultural intensification nor with the expansion of cultivated land. Seed aid seems to substitute rather than supplement local seed varieties. These findings emphasize a lack of intentionality in seed aid distribution. Still, it must be noted that the effectiveness of seed aid distribution may be greater outside our study area, above the green belt, where conflicts and natural disasters remain more frequent and intense, and where farmers are more likely to be seed insecure. But overall, this study supports the widespread perception that South Sudan is ready for a transition towards a market-based seed distribution system.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
World Development Perspectives
Published
2024-10-08
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wdp.2024.100638
Primary Topic
Agricultural Innovations and Practices
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Is seed aid distribution still justified in South Sudan?

Rob Kuijpers, Esther Smits, Justin Amos Miteng, David Deng Chol et al.
World Development Perspectives
Agricultural Innovations and Practices
article

Is seed aid distribution still justified in South Sudan?

Rob Kuijpers, Esther Smits, Justin Amos Miteng, David Deng Chol, Turo Thomas Mono, Nicola Francesconi
article en

Abstract

• We analyze the targeting and impact of seed aid across the equatorial states of South Sudan. • Seed aid is widely distributed, favoring well-connected households over vulnerable, food insecure households. • The cultivation of relief seeds does not result in increased agricultural production through intensification or expansion. • Seed aid seems to substitute rather than supplement local seeds, hampering seed sector development in post-conflict settings. Seed aid—or free distribution of seeds to farmers—is a popular intervention to simultaneously reduce food insecurity and dependency on food aid in fragile countries. However, seed aid distribution also has the potential to hinder or distort the development of local seed markets. In this study we analyze the targeting and impact of seed aid across the green belt (cutting across the southern/equatorial states) of South Sudan. Using a primary and unique dataset on 1,990 farm households, we find that seed aid is widely rather than selectively distributed. Almost a third of farm households receive seed aid despite the general availability of locally recycled seed varieties. Seed aid distribution does not seem to favor particularly poor, vulnerable and food insecure households, but those that are embedded in community networks, organizations and institutions. Using a double robust methodology based on Inverse Probability Weighted Regression Adjustment (IPWRA), we also find that the adoption of seed aid by farm households does not result in increased maize production, as it is neither associated with agricultural intensification nor with the expansion of cultivated land. Seed aid seems to substitute rather than supplement local seed varieties. These findings emphasize a lack of intentionality in seed aid distribution. Still, it must be noted that the effectiveness of seed aid distribution may be greater outside our study area, above the green belt, where conflicts and natural disasters remain more frequent and intense, and where farmers are more likely to be seed insecure. But overall, this study supports the widespread perception that South Sudan is ready for a transition towards a market-based seed distribution system.

World Development PerspectivesVol. 36
International Fertilizer Development Center (US), Royal Tropical Institute (NL)
Openalex Percentile: Top 69%
Agricultural Innovations and Practices
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.