The long-running debate concerning the special characteristics of peasant production in less developed countries which may lead to perverse supply responses in their agricultural sectors is explored. Four stages in the debate are identified. The first was based on casual observation and the target income or fixity-of-wants hypothesis. The second took account of peasant own-consumption and focused on the marketed surplus. The third addressed the possible effect of uncertainty and risk aversion on supply response. The fourth is embodied in modern farm household models of peasant behaviour. Although the predictions regarding supply response derived from these models vary, they all suggest that agricultural supply response may be negative. The bulk of empirical evidence, however, for both total production and marketed surplus tends to refute the notion, whether it is theoretically consistent or not, that supply response in peasant agriculture is negative.
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read
the IDEAS help
page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS
site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Christopher F. Baum).
Related research
Keywords:
Cited by: (explanations, Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.)