BLESSING OR CURSE? THE IMPACTS OF NON-AGRICULTURAL PART-TIME WORK OF THE LARGE FARMER HOUSEHOLDS ON AGRICULTURAL LABOR PRODUCTIVITY

This study analyzes the mechanism of coexistence of non-agricultural part-time work of farmer households and large-scale cultivation of cultivated land, and the effect of non-agricultural part-time work of the large farmer households on the agricultural labor productivity. Results indicate that non-agricultural part-time work of large farmer households promotes the agricultural labor productivity, particularly for those with higher non-agricultural incomes, younger age, higher education level and shorter distance between working places in urban sectors and rural residence. At the mean value of the samples, non-agricultural part-time work of the large farmer households will improve agricultural labor productivity by 27.1%. These results remain consistent after we experiment several robustness checks and the instrumental variable method. Further, it is worth stressing that non-agricultural part-time work inhibits the agricultural production for farmer households with labors less than three, while it exhibits positive effects for those with labors more than three. Finally, analysis of mechanism suggests that non-agricultural part-time work of large farmer households enhances the productivity via entering the agricultural association, increasing farm mechanization degree, and promoting the centralized production and farm management on the transferred farmland. It’s suggestive to maintain total area of the transferred farmland to avoid the reverse effects and then the optimal total cultivated area within the range of (100, 200) Mu. Policy implications of our work are discussed.

A perspective on agricultural labor productivity and greenhouse gas emissions in context of the Common Agricultural Policy exigencies

European agriculture is the result and experiences of a numerous and md determinant reforms during last period of time. Labor productivity and green gas emissions represents two major turning points in analyzing the Common Agricultural Policy evolution. The main aim of this research is to make a synoptic analysis of the agriculture evolution in context of the new Common Agricultural Policy paradigm transformation from the perspective of sectorial structural changes determined by the new environmental exigencies and labor productivity.

The Equilibrium Impact of Agricultural Risk on Intermediate Inputs and Aggregate Productivity

I consider the aggregate impact of low intermediate input intensity in the agricultural sector of developing countries. In a dynamic general equilibrium model with idiosyncratic shocks, incomplete markets, and subsistence requirements, farmers in developing countries use fewer intermediate inputs because it limits their exposure to uninsurable shocks. The calibrated model implies that Indian agricultural productivity would increase by 16 percent if markets were complete, driven by quantitatively important increases in both the average real intermediate share and measured TFP through lower misallocation. I then extend the results to consider the importance of risk in other contexts. First, the introduction of insurance decreases cross-country differences in agricultural labor productivity by 14 percent. Second, scaling the introduction of improved seeds to decrease downside risk reduces inequality by reallocating resources from rich to poor farmers via equilibrium effects. This reallocation substantially increases aggregate productivity relative to what would be expected from extrapolating the partial equilibrium impact.

Capital Obsolescence and Agricultural Productivity*

This article argues that accounting for capital-embodied technology greatly increases the importance of capital in explaining cross-country differences in agricultural labor productivity. To do so, we draw on a novel data set of agricultural capital prices. We document that new capital is more expensive in richer countries, both in absolute terms and relative to old capital. A model of endogenous adoption of capital of different quality links these price differences to the path of capital-embodied technology. In particular, our model recovers the level of embodied technology from the price of new capital and the growth rate of embodied technology from the price of new capital relative to old capital. We then measure the stocks of quality-adjusted capital in agriculture for a sample of 16 countries at different stages of development. We find that adjusting for differences in quality almost doubles the importance of capital in accounting for cross-country differences in agricultural labor productivity: from 21% to 37%. In addition, improvements in capital quality have been an important source of agricultural labor productivity growth over the past 25 years, accounting for 21% and 35% of the productivity growth in poor and rich countries, respectively.

AGRICULTURAL CREDITS AND AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTIVITY: CROSS-COUNTRY EVIDENCE

We present cross-country evidence suggesting that agricultural credits have a positive impact on agricultural productivity. In particular, we find that doubling agricultural credits generates around 4–5% increase in agricultural productivity. We use two different agricultural production measures: (i) the agricultural component of GDP and (ii) agricultural labor productivity. Employing a combination of panel-data and instrumental-variable methods, we show that agricultural credits operate mostly on the agricultural component of GDP in developing countries and agricultural labor productivity in developed countries. This suggests that the nature of the relationship between agricultural finance and agricultural output changes along the development path. We conjecture that the development of the agricultural finance system generates entry into the agricultural labor market, which pushes up the agricultural component of GDP and keeps down agricultural labor productivity in developing countries; while, in developed countries, it leads to labor-augmenting increase in agricultural production. We argue that replacement of the informal credit channel with formal and advanced agricultural credit markets along the development path is the main force driving the labor market response.