By utilizing the rational addiction framework, this article investigates the dynamics of fertilizer consumption influenced by subsidy policies. By estimating a demand equation that incorporates addictive behaviours—tolerance, reinforcement and withdrawal—the research highlights how past consumption influences future usage, creating a cycle of dependency that is difficult to break. Empirical evidence supports the hypothesis that subsidy dependence in Indian agriculture mimics addictive behaviour, with farmers increasing consumption over time despite diminishing returns. This addiction not only perpetuates environmental and financial inefficiencies but also hinders policy reforms aimed at sustainable agricultural practices and showcases the need for a gradual transition towards more sustainable farming methods.
BBC. (2021, December 9). Farm laws: India farmers end protest after government accepts demands. BBC News. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-59566157
2.
BeckerG. S., & MurphyK. M. (1988). A theory of rational addiction. Journal of Political Economy, 96(4), 675–700. https://doi.org/10.1086/261558
3.
BoyerM. (1983). Rational demand and expenditures patterns under habit formation. Journal of Economic Theory, 31(1), 27–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-0531(83)90019-4
4.
ChaloupkaF. (1991). Rational addictive behavior and cigarette smoking. Journal of Political Economy, 99(4), 722–742. https://doi.org/10.1086/261776
5.
ElsterJ. (1977). Ulysses and the sirens: A theory of imperfect rationality. Social Science Information, 16(5), 469–526. https://doi.org/10.1177/053901847701600501
6.
FAO, UNDP, & UNEP. (2021). A multi-billion-dollar opportunity – Repurposing agricultural support to transform food systems. FAO. https://doi.org/10.4060/cb6562en
7.
FixenP., BrentrupF., BruulsemaT., GarciaF., NortonR., & ZingoreS. (2015). Nutrient/fertilizer use efficiency: Measurement, current situation and trends. In IFA, IWMI, IPNI, & IPI (Eds.), Managing water and fertilizer for sustainable agricultural intensification (pp. 8–38). https://www.researchgate.net/publication/269709648_Nutrientfertilizer_use_efficiency_measurement_current_situation_and_trends
8.
GormanW. M. (1967). Tastes, habits and choices. International Economic Review, 8(2), 218–222. https://doi.org/10.2307/2525605
9.
HouthakkerH. S., & TaylorL. D. (1966). Consumer demand in the United States, 1929–1970: Analysis and projections. Cambridge University Press.
10.
JhaP., & ChaloupkaF. J. (2000). Tobacco control in developing countries. Oxford University Press.
11.
KeelerT. E., HuT.-W., BarnettP. G., & ManningW. G. (1993). Taxation, regulation, and addiction: A demand function for cigarettes based on time-series evidence. Journal of Health Economics, 12(1), 1–18. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/016762969390037F
12.
LluchC. (1974). Expenditure, savings and habit formation. International Economic Review, 15(3), 786–797. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2525741
13.
McKenzieR. B. (1979). The non-rational domain and the limits of economic analysis. Southern Economic Journal, 46(1), 145–157. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1057009
14.
Ministry of Chemicals and Fertilizers, Government of India. (2022). Year-end review of the Department of Fertilizers–2022. Press Information Bureau. https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=1886054
PattanayakS. K., YangJ.-C., WhittingtonD., & Bal KumarK. C. (2005). Coping with unreliable public water supplies: Averting expenditures by households in Kathmandu, Nepal. Water Resources Research, 41(W02012). https://doi.org/10.1029/2003WR002443
17.
PiccoliL., & TiezziS. (2021). Rational addiction and time-consistency: An empirical test. Journal of Health Economics, 80, 102546. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhealeco.2021.102546
18.
PraveenK. V., SinghA., & JhaG. K. (2024). Moving towards sustainable production through access to extension services: Evidence from rice growing states. Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 79(1), 148–157. https://isaeindia.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/06-k.v.praveen-WITH-DOI.pdf
19.
QuizonJ. (1985). Withdrawal of fertiliser subsidies: An economic appraisal. Economic & Political Weekly, 20(39), A117–A123. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4374869
20.
RahmanK. M. A., & ZhangD. (2018). Effects of fertilizer broadcasting on the excessive use of inorganic fertilizers and environmental sustainability. Sustainability, 10(3), 759. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10030759
21.
SavciS. (2012). An agricultural pollutant: Chemical fertilizer. International Journal of Environmental Science and Development, 3(1), 77–80.
22.
SchmallE., & SinghK. D. (2021, March 23). Why India’s farmers fight to save a broken system. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/23/world/asia/india-farmers-protest-subsidies.html
23.
SharmaN., PannuR. S., MalikD. P., SainV., & KayasthaR. (2022). Analysis of growth trends of production and consumption of fertilizer nutrients in India. Economic Affairs, 67(3), 189–196. http://dx.doi.org/10.46852/0424-2513.3.2022.6
24.
SinghS. (2022, January17). India plans $19 billion fertilizer subsidy to placate angry farmers. Bloomberg. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-01-17/india-said-to-plan-19-billion-in-fertilizer-subsidy-in-budget
25.
SinghS. C., & OhriN. (2023, January3). India aims for $17 bln cut in food, fertiliser subsidies in 2023/24. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/markets/asia/india-aims-17-bln-cut-food-fertiliser-subsidies-202324-sources-2023-01-03/
SungH.-Y., HuT.-W., & KeelerT. E. (1994). Cigarette taxation and demand: An empirical model. Contemporary Economic Policy, 12(3), 91–100. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1465-7287.1994.tb00437.x
28.
The Fertiliser Association of India. (2022). Fertiliser Statistics 2021–22. https://fertiliserindia.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Fertiliser-Stat-Book-2021-22.pdf
29.
TilmanD., CassmanK. G., MatsonP. A., NaylorR., & PolaskyS. (2002). Agricultural sustainability and intensive production practices. Nature, 418(6898), 671–677. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature01014
30.
WinstonG. C. (1980). Addiction and backsliding: A theory of compulsive consumption. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 1(4), 295–324. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-2681(80)90009-8
31.
ZhangW., ThornJ. P. R., GowdyJ., BassiA., SantamariaM., DeClerckF., AdegboyegaA., AnderssonG., AugustynA. M., BawdenR., BellA., DarnhoferI., DearingJ., DykeJ., FaillerP., GalettoP., Calvo HernandezC., JohnsonP., KleppelG., … WoodS. L. R. (2018). Systems thinking: An approach for understanding “eco-agri-food systems”. In TEEB for Agriculture and Food: Scientific and Economic Foundations (pp. 17–56). The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity. https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/164950
