This thesis investigates the design, implementation and impacts of the market-smart input
subsidy (NAIVS) in Tanzania’s Ruvuma Region.
The research uses a mixed-methods approach, where quantitative data analysis is
complemented by qualitative research. Using four waves of household panel data, I found that
voucher receipt had no statistically significant impact on maize yields, income poverty or the
household assets owned by recipient households. The qualitative research finds that this was due
to flaws in NAIVS’s design and in its implementation. Weak institutional capacity was found in
voucher management, especially at the lower level of government: a substantial number of
vouchers went missing; inputs and vouchers were delivered late most years; and vouchers were
resold by farmers.
Due to an increase in real input prices, the ‘top-up’ payment required for voucher use
was increased, which made it difficult for poor farmers to access the subsidy. In practice, the
input vouchers were obtained by elites: households with elected positions in the villages;
wealthier households; and those households who were already using improved inputs prior to
NAIVS. It contributed to national food security; however, because of the spill-over effects which
brought a higher increase ratio in input use among non-recipient than recipient households, the
observed impact on maize yields cannot be attributed to NAIVS. Because of the leakage to
wealthier farmers and fraud, it did not ensure household food security for poor farmers.
The thesis reveals that studies of input subsidy programmes require not only economic
analysis but also social and political analysis. Such studies would require the use of a new theory
of change, which uses economic analysis but places social and political analysis at the forefront,
and in which a mixed-methods approach must be used.