The conference agenda provides an overview and details of sessions. In order to view sessions on a specific day or for a certain room, please select an appropriate date or room link. You may also select a session to explore available abstracts and download papers and presentations.
08-11: Is Land Tenure Formalization Increasing Investments?
Market Exposure Makes Smallholders More Competitive and Closes the Gender Gap
Kiel Institute for the World Economy, Germany
Our investigation concentrates on the encounter of two economic and farming systems which are at the extremes along the dimension of market exposure: peasant, communal subsistence farming on the one hand and large-scale, capital-intense and profit-oriented farming by the global agricultural industry on the other hand. To this end, we conduct our investigation in Zambia – a popular destination for large-scale agricultural investors. Our investigation takes advantage of spatial differences in market exposure of rural and remote villages. Based on competition decisions of 935 adults and 401 children, we find that living in the proximity of large-scale agricultural investment sites makes smallholders more competitive. This effect is particularly strong for females and achieves closing of the gender gap in competitiveness in the villages with market exposure. A second driver of competitiveness is market integration of smallholders by selling their produce at markets. We regard our findings as highly important for the understanding of what societal arrangements influence individuals’ preferences. As policy makers in developing countries are able to steer market exposure through the settlement of large-scale investments, our findings hold important policy implications
Do the land poor gain from agricultural investments? Empirical evidence from Zambia using panel data
gothenburg university sweden, Sweden
In the context of the global land rush, some portray large-scale land acquisitions as a potent threat to the livelihoods of already marginalized rural farming households in Africa. In order to avoid the potential pitfall of studying a particular project that may well have atypical effects, this paper systematically investigates the impact of all pledged investments in the agricultural sector on commercial farm wage incomes for rural smallholder households in Zambia 1994–2007. The results, which are robust to both placebo tests and a variety of different specifications and time frames, show that agricultural investments are associated with a moderately positive effect, but only for households with a relative shortage of land.
Land Property Rights and Agricultural Productivity: Evidence from Panama
Tohoku University, Japan
This paper estimates the effects of land property rights on agricultural productivity in Panama. Using district level panel data to investigate the impact of privately owned land on agricultural productivity from 1990 to 2010, I find that land privatization increases rice yield in agriculture labor intensive districts, but it does not have any significant impact in non agriculture intensive districts. Then, using household level data I find that households with registered land titles are more likely to obtain an agriculture loan and undertake land-attached and land mobile investments.
Agricultural Intensification and Market Participation under Learning Externality: Impact Evaluation on Small-scale Agriculture
UNU-MERIT, Netherlands, The
This study provides empirical evidence regarding the impact of agricultural technologies (high-yielding varieties and inorganic fertilizer) on smallholders’ output market participation. The analysis is based on Farmer Innovation Fund impact evaluation survey collected by the World Bank in 2010-2013 covering 2,675 households in Ethiopia. Endogenous treatment effect and sample selection models are employed to account for the self-selection bias in technology adoption and market participation decision. Regressions based on matching techniques are employed for robustness check. The estimation results show that the use of improved agricultural technologies significantly affect farm households marketable surplus production. We found evidence that application of high-yielding varieties increases surplus crop production by 7.6 percent per year, whereas chemical fertilizer use increases surplus by 2.8 percent. When farmers apply the two technologies jointly, marketed surplus increases by 6.4 percent, which establishes the complementarity of the two technologies. Marketable surplus crop production and market participation of farmers are determined by access to modern inputs, crop price, farm size, availability of labor, and infrastructure. Access to credit and training fosters technology adoption, however, we are unable to witness learning externality from neighbors on smallholders marketed surplus. Therefore, agriculture and rural development policy needs to focus on supporting agricultural technology adoption.