Impact of Price Policy on Farm Household Income in Korea

1979 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 25-47
Author(s):  
Ki-Hyuk Pak
Keyword(s):  
Household Income ◽  
Price Policy ◽  
Farm Household ◽  
On Farm

The Impact of Rural Taxation Reform on Farm Household Income

2009 ◽  
Vol 42 (4) ◽  
pp. 75-90 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cuiping Xu ◽  
Qinghua Shi ◽  
H. Holly Wang
Keyword(s):  
Household Income ◽  
Farm Household ◽  
Taxation Reform ◽  
On Farm ◽  
The Impact

scholarly journals Farm Household Income and On- and Off-Farm Diversification

2005 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 37-48 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin T. McNamara ◽  
Christoph Weiss
Keyword(s):  
Household Income ◽  
Census Data ◽  
Farm Income ◽  
Federal State ◽  
Farm Labor ◽  
Farm Household ◽  
Labor Allocation ◽  
Farm Diversification ◽  
Upper Austria ◽  
On Farm

The paper analyzes the relationship between off-farm labor allocation and on-farm enterprise diversification as farm household income stabilization strategies with census data from the federal state of Upper Austria, Austria. The results suggest that both on-farm diversification and off-farm labor allocation are related to farm and household characteristics. Larger farms tend to be more diversified. Younger farmers are more likely to work off-farm. Larger farm households tend to allocate more labor to off-farm income activities.

scholarly journals An Economy-Wide Analysis of Trade Liberalization Impacts on Farm Household Income in Taiwan

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (12) ◽  
pp. 1984-2005
Author(s):  
Yichieh Chen ◽  
Hsing-Chun Lin ◽  
Sheng-Ming Hsu ◽  
Yu-Chieh Chang ◽  
Ruey-Wan Liou ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Trade Liberalization ◽  
Household Income ◽  
Farm Household ◽  
On Farm

scholarly journals Impact of tissue culture banana technology on farm household income and food security in Kenya

Food Policy ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 45 ◽  
pp. 25-34 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nassul S. Kabunga ◽  
Thomas Dubois ◽  
Matin Qaim
Keyword(s):  
Tissue Culture ◽  
Food Security ◽  
Household Income ◽  
Farm Household ◽  
On Farm

scholarly journals DISTRIBUSI PENDAPATAN RUMAH TANGGA PETANI DI KABUPATEN KARANGANYAR

Agro Ekonomi ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 27
Author(s):  
Umi Barokah ◽  
Dwidjono Hadi Darwanto ◽  
Supriyanto Supriyanto
Keyword(s):  
Income Distribution ◽  
Household Income ◽  
Industrial Area ◽  
Farm Income ◽  
Cluster Sampling ◽  
Farm Household ◽  
Small Farmers ◽  
Income Household ◽  
Multi Stage ◽  
On Farm

The purpose of this research is to study the contribution of off-farm to income household and the effect of off-farm to income distribution between farm household. The location is choosen purposively based on the number of people as farmers, numbers and kind of industries and acessibility to reach economic centre. This research used multi stage sampling, the first was by cluster sampling, where all farm household from two village in Ngringo (kecamatan Jaten) and Tunggulrejo (kecamatan Jumantono) interviewed. And second stratified sampling based on farm size.The result showed that off-farm income (56,26 %) is greater than farm income (43,74 %). Off-farm income of small farmers (71,42 %) is greater than large farmers (45,18 %). Off-farm employment increased household income and the inequality of income tend to reduce. But off-farm employment is mainly for large farmers and close to the industrial area. In contrast, off-farm income increase inequality for small farmers in area far from industrial area

scholarly journals Technology Adoption and Off-Farm Household Income: The Case of Herbicide-Tolerant Soybeans

2005 ◽  
Vol 37 (3) ◽  
pp. 549-563 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jorge Fernandez-Cornejo ◽  
Chad Hendricks ◽  
Ashok Mishra
Keyword(s):  
Technology Adoption ◽  
Household Income ◽  
Nationwide Survey ◽  
Farm Household ◽  
Agricultural Technologies ◽  
Farm Work ◽  
Total Household Income ◽  
Herbicide Tolerant ◽  
On Farm ◽  
The Impact

We model the interaction of off-farm work and adoption of agricultural technologies and the impact of adopting these technologies on farm household income from on farm and off-farm sources after controlling for such interaction, and estimate the model for the case of adoption of herbicide-tolerant (HT) soybeans using a nationwide survey of soybean farms for 2000. We find that adoption of HT soybeans is positively and significantly related to off-farm household income for U.S. soybean farmers, after controlling for other factors. In addition, while on-farm household income is not significantly related to adoption, total household income increases significantly with adoption.

scholarly journals PENDAPATAN DAN TINGKAT KESEJAHTERAAN RUMAH TANGGA NELAYAN TRADISIONAL DI KECAMATAN TELUK PANDAN KABUPATEN PESAWARAN

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 272
Author(s):  
Marina Ulva ◽  
Fembriarti Erry Prasmatiwi ◽  
Eka Kasymir
Keyword(s):  
Household Income ◽  
Sampling Method ◽  
Binary Logistic Regression ◽  
Simple Random Sampling ◽  
Survey Method ◽  
Farm Household ◽  
Welfare Level ◽  
Factors Influencing ◽  
Central Agency ◽  
On Farm

This research is to analyze income obtained by traditional fishermen from fish catching, their householdincome, the level of welfare, and factors influencing the welfare level of traditional fishermen households inTeluk Pandan District. This study was conducted in Sukajaya Lempasing Village, Teluk Pandan District,Pesawaran Regency with a survey method. Respondents were 48 traditional fishermen who used netfish andwere selected using simple random sampling method. Household income consists of on farm, off-farm, andnon-farm. Household welfare level is analyzed by Central Agency on Statistics 2014 and the Sajogyo 1997criteria. The factors influencing welfare are determined using binary logistic regression. The resultsshowed that the income obtained by fishermen from fish catches in the western season was Rp6,570,375, inthe eastem season was Rp25,452,214, and in the normal season was Rp15,229,771. The contribution of fishcatches income (on farm) was 91.01 percent, the contribution of bussines income in the agricultural sectoroutside the fish catches (off farm) was 5.55 percent, and the contribution of business outside the agriculturalsector (non-farm) was 3.60 percent. As many as 68.77percent of the traditional fishermen households areclassified as unprosperous yet and 31.25 percent are prosperous based on Central agency on Statistics 2014criteria. The factors influencing the welfare of traditional fishermen households were the level of educationand income.Key words: income, traditional fishermen, welfare.

scholarly journals Farm household income inequality in Slovenia

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. e0112 ◽  
Author(s):  
Štefan Bojnec ◽  
Imre Fertő
Keyword(s):  
Income Inequality ◽  
Agricultural Policy ◽  
Common Agricultural Policy ◽  
Household Income ◽  
Farm Income ◽  
Farm Household ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Market Income ◽  
On Farm ◽  
The Impact

Aim of study: To investigate the structure and evolution of farm household income and examine the contribution of different sources of farm household income, particularly the impact of Common Agricultural Policy reform on farm household income inequality in Slovenia.Area of study: Slovenia, one of the European Union member states.Material and methods: A panel data set was compiled using Slovenian Farm Accountancy Data Network data at farm level for the period 2007-2013. Total farm household income was disaggregated into two different components: 1) income components, which can contain market income and off-farm income, and 2) subsidy components, which can contain subsidies from Pillars 1 and 2. Pillar 2 support included subsidies related to agri-environmental measures, less favoured areas and other rural development measures. The income distribution and decomposition were examined using the Gini decomposition method to determine the contribution of each income source and the policy shift from market to government support on farm household income and overall inequality.Main results: A shift in Common Agricultural Policy and related measures determined the structure and evolution of farm household incomes. Off-farm income had a lesser and rather stable impact on farm household income inequality, while the major change involved an increase in the importance of subsidies from Pillar 2 which is consistent with a policy of targeting farms in less favoured areas. Subsidies from Pillar 1 reduced, while market income increased farm household income inequality.Research highlights: Subsidies in farm incomes increased. They could reduce farm household income inequality.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document