Determinants of Household Income among Input Subsidy Beneficiaries and Non-beneficiaries: Evidence from Smallholder Maize Farmers in Eastern Equatoria State, South Sudan

Abstract

Background: Agriculture is the primary livelihood source for most households in South Sudan, yet maize productivity and rural incomes remain low despite government- and donor-supported interventions. Input subsidy programmes have been widely promoted as mechanisms for improving agricultural productivity, increasing household income and enhancing rural welfare. However, evidence on the determinants of income among smallholder maize farmers who participate and do not participate in input subsidy programmes remains limited, particularly in post-conflict settings such as Eastern Equatoria State, South Sudan. Aim: This study examined the determinants of household income among smallholder maize farmers participating and not participating in the input subsidy programme in Eastern Equatoria State, South Sudan. Specifically, the study estimated household income levels, compared income across participation groups and counties, assessed income inequality and identified the key factors influencing household income. Methods: A cross-sectional survey design was employed using primary data collected from 385 smallholder maize-producing households selected through a multistage sampling procedure from Torit, Magwi and Ikotos counties. Descriptive statistics, income and inequality analyses, and multiple linear regression were used to analyse the data. Household income was estimated as the sum of income derived from maize production and livestock enterprises. Income inequality was measured using the Gini coefficient, while a log-linear regression model was used to identify the determinants of household income. Results: The results showed that the mean annual household income was SSP 15.6 million. Farmers participating in the input subsidy programme earned significantly higher incomes (SSP 22.0 million) than non-participants (SSP 17.2 million). Income inequality was moderate, with a Gini coefficient of 0.415. The regression model explained 50.3% of the variation in household income (R² = 0.503). Maize farm size had a positive and highly significant influence on household income (β = 0.867; p < 0.001), while household size (β = -0.043; p = 0.023), distance to market (β = -0.041; p = 0.014) and poor soil fertility (β = -0.203; p = 0.016) significantly reduced household income. Maize farm size emerged as the strongest determinant of household income. Conclusion and Recommendation: The study concludes that household income among smallholder maize farmers in Eastern Equatoria State is significantly influenced by farm size, household demographic characteristics, market accessibility and soil fertility conditions. Participation in the input subsidy programme is associated with higher household income, indicating its potential contribution to rural livelihood improvement. The study recommends strengthening input subsidy programmes alongside investments in rural infrastructure, market access and integrated soil fertility management. Policies that enhance land productivity and improve farmers' access to extension and market services are essential for achieving sustainable income growth and improved welfare among smallholder maize farmers in South Sudan.