Sorry for the delay in responding. We find that the average amount held by those farmers who took up the solution was 32 kilograms, which is equivalent to roughly 5% of reported harvest output (609 kg). Five percent of farm income is a relatively substantial sum, especially given that much of maize people typically hold is for consumption but the maize held in the GSRA is intended to be illiquid.
As for implementation, IPA and JPAL's sister organization Evidence Action is involved in scaling up those ideas that are found to be particularly effective during randomize evaluations, the kind we are proposing to do.
Dear William, Perhaps I am misunderstanding the question, but to my mind, a big part of why this is a good idea is that the grain is stored locally, so that transportation and storage costs are minimal and monitoring is easier. Why would the farmers be better off storing at a far-away processing center? Thanks for your continued interest in our idea! Shilpa
Dear William, We're not proposing a scale-up of the subsidy. However, we do think that it is important to understand the extent to which farmers are deterred from taking advantage of inter-temporal arbitrage opportunities due to a lack of good storage facilities. Thanks, Shilpa