Effectiveness of Agricultural subsidies in Zhambyl region: an empirical analysis

This study empirically examines the effectiveness of agricultural subsidies in enhancing farm productivity in the Zhambyl region of Kazakhstan over the 2010–2025 period. Despite substantial public expenditure and the widespread use of subsidies as a core instrument of agricultural policy, their actual contribution to productivity growth remains contested. Using a quantitative research design, this study analyzes panel data from 34 farms (510 observations) obtained from the Ministry of Agriculture of the Republic of Kazakhstan. A two-way fixed effects regression model, validated through the Hausman test, is employed to estimate the relationship between subsidy amounts and farm productivity, controlling for land area and fixed assets. Diagnostic tests confirm the model’s compliance with key classical regression assumptions. The results reveal that agricultural subsidies have no statistically significant effect on farm productivity (β = 0.228, p > 0.05). This finding remains robust across sub-period analyses (2010–2015 and 2016–2025), indicating that increased subsidy volumes have not translated into measurable productivity gains. The study identifies structural inefficiencies in subsidy design, including disproportionate allocation to large farms, weak conditionality, and a focus on cost compensation rather than performance stimulation. These findings contribute to the growing body of evidence questioning the efficacy of untargeted financial support and underscore the urgent need for policy reform. The paper advocates for a transition toward “smart,” region-specific, and results-based subsidy mechanisms linked to technology adoption, sustainable practices, and robust monitoring frameworks. The study provides actionable recommendations for policymakers seeking to enhance the efficiency and sustainability of public spending in Kazakhstan’s agricultural sector.

1. Gautam M. (2015) Agricultural Subsidies: A Historical and Global Perspective. Washington, D.C.: World Bank Publications. 45 p. (In English)

2. Atanasov D., Lubeniqi G. (2018) Impact of subsidies on rural development and employment // Journal of Agricultural Science. No. 12. P. 45–58. (In English)

3. Meyer R.L. (2011) Subsidies in agricultural finance: “Smart” design and implementation // World Bank ESA Paper. No. 1. P. 12–34. (In English)

4. Garrone M. et al. (2019) The impact of the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) on agricultural productivity // Food Policy. Vol. 83. P. 130–143. (In English)

5. Jayne T.S. et al. (2013) Review of fertilizer subsidy programs in Africa // Agricultural Economics. Vol. 44. No. 6. P. 687–703. (In English)

6. Dorward A. et al. (2008) Towards “smart” subsidies in agriculture? Lessons from Malawi // Natural Resource Perspectives. No. 11. P. 1–6. (In English)

7. Kirwan B.E., Roberts M.J. (2016) Who benefits from U.S. agricultural subsidies? // Review of Economics and Statistics. Vol. 98. No. 1. P. 108–125. (In English)

8. Paiva C. (2014) Agricultural Trade and Protectionism in Industrialized Nations: A Gravity Model Analysis // IMF Working Papers. 28 p. (In English)

9. Heyl K. et al. (2021) Downscaling environmentally harmful subsidies under the CAP // Sustainability. No. 13. P. 15–28. (In English)

10. Homolka J., Švecová L. (2015) Effects of the Common Agricultural Policy on Czech agricultural enterprises // Agrarian Perspectives. No. 2. P. 55–64. (In English)

11. Sigarev M.I., Nurkuzhaev Zh.M. (2017) Rol’ gosudarstvennoj podderzhki v agrarnom sektore Kazahstana // Problemy agrorynka. No. 2. Р. 15–22. (In Russian)

12. Zholamanova M.T., Shajhutdinova G.K. (2021) Rol’ institutov razvitija v podderzhke sel’skogo hozjajstva Kazahstana // Vestnik KazNU. Serija jekonomicheskaja. No. 2. Р. 156–165. (In Russian)

13. Seitov S.K. (2018) Jeffektivnost’ sel’skohozjajstvennyh subsidij v Kazahstane // Issledovanija, rezul’taty. 2018. No. 1. Р. 210–217. (In Russian)

14. OECD. OECD Review of Agricultural Policies: Kazakhstan 2013. Paris: OECD Publishing, 2013. 180 p. (In English)

15. Kantarbaeva Sh.M., TlesovaA.B. Gosudarstvennoe subsidirovanie sel’skohozjajstvennyh proizvoditelej Kazahstana // Vestnik universiteta «Turan». 2019. No. 3. Р. 45–51. (In Russian)

16. Zakirova A.Zh. i dr. Upravlenie finansovymi potokami na sel’skohozjajstvennyh predprijatijah // Jekonomika i statistika. 2020. No. 2. Р. 88–95. (In Russian)

17. Umbetaliev A.D. (2021) Mehanizmy subsidirovanija APK v Kazahstane: problemy i perspektivy // Jekonomika: strategija i analiz. No. 4. Р. 112–120. (In Russian)

18. Jambyl Region // Wikipedia. URL: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jambyl_Region (accessed: 20.02.2025) (In English)

19. Ministerstvo sel’skogo hozjajstva Respubliki Kazahstan: oficial’nyj sajt. URL: https://www.gov.kz/memleket/entities/moa/documents/1?lang=ru (data obrashhenija: 20.02.2025) (In Russian)