IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/csa/wpaper/2004-16.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Production changes in ghana cocoa farming households under market reforms

Author

Listed:
  • Francis Teal
  • Marcella Vigneri

Abstract

The Ghana cocoa market has been extensively liberalised over the period since the mid 1980s. Three issues have been prominent in microeconomic research on the effects of liberalisation on agriculture. The first has been the size of any supply response, the second has been the effect on producers of reduced subsidies on inputs, and the third whether innovation has occurred. In this paper we investigate these issues by estimating a production function for cocoa in Ghana drawing on two household surveys covering the period from 1991 to 1998. The estimated production function allows identifying the factors underlying the change in output. The analysis of the micro data shows that the increase in household output has been very modest at 6 per cent. While the effect of liberalisation has been to raise the price of inputs we find that the contribution of such inputs to cocoa production has increased both relative to land and, very substantially, relative to labour. The ratio of both land and nonlabour inputs to labour rose implying a rise in labour productivity of 39 while land productivity was unchanged. We find no evidence that reforms have led to innovation in techniques which raise total factor productivity. Possible reasons for these outcomes are suggested.

Suggested Citation

  • Francis Teal & Marcella Vigneri, 2004. "Production changes in ghana cocoa farming households under market reforms," CSAE Working Paper Series 2004-16, Centre for the Study of African Economies, University of Oxford.
    • Handle: RePEc:csa:wpaper:2004-16
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:978663ff-aac4-469c-95d4-281bd7c975ad
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ravallion, Martin, 1988. "Expected Poverty under Risk-Induced Welfare Variability," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 98(393), pages 1171-1182, December.
    2. Barrett, Christopher B., 1996. "On price risk and the inverse farm size-productivity relationship," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 193-215, December.
    3. Newey, Whitney K & Powell, James L & Walker, James R, 1990. "Semiparametric Estimation of Selection Models: Some Empirical Results," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(2), pages 324-328, May.
    4. Christiaan Grootaert & Ravi Kanbur & Gi-Taik Oh, 1997. "The dynamics of welfare gains and losses: An African case study," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(5), pages 635-657.
    5. World Bank, 2002. "World Development Indicators 2002," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 13921.
    6. Lamb, Russell L., 2003. "Inverse productivity: land quality, labor markets, and measurement error," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(1), pages 71-95, June.
    7. John Dreze & Peter Lanjouw & Nicholas Stern, 1992. "Economic Mobility and Agricultural Labour in Rural India: A Case Study," Indian Economic Review, Department of Economics, Delhi School of Economics, vol. 27, pages 25-54.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Vasco Molini & Michiel Keyzer & Bart van den Boom & Wouter Zant & Nicholas Nsowah-Nuamah, 2010. "Safety Nets and Index-Based Insurance: Historical Assessment and Semiparametric Simulation for Northern Ghana," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 58(4), pages 671-712, July.
    2. Charles Ackah, & Oliver Morrissey, & Simon Appleton, 2007. "Who Gains from Trade Protection in Ghana? A Household-Level Analysis," Discussion Papers 07/02, University of Nottingham, CREDIT.
    3. Diao, Xinshen & Hazell, Peter & Resnick, Danielle & Thurlow, James, 2006. "The role of agriculture in development: implications for Sub-Saharan Africa," DSGD discussion papers 29, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    4. Besseah, Felix A. & Kim, Sangho, 2014. "Technical Efficiency of Cocoa Farmers in Ghana," Journal of Rural Development/Nongchon-Gyeongje, Korea Rural Economic Institute, vol. 37(2), pages 1-24.
    5. Benin, Samuel, 2016. "Returns to agricultural public spending in Ghana: Cocoa versus noncocoa subsector:," IFPRI discussion papers 1503, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    6. Charles Ackah, & Simon Appleton, 2007. "Food Price Changes and Consumer Welfare in Ghana in the 1990s," Discussion Papers 07/03, University of Nottingham, CREDIT.
    7. Brooks, Jonathan & Croppenstedt, Andre & Aggrey-Fynn, Emmanuel, 2007. "Distortions to Agricultural Incentives in Ghana," Agricultural Distortions Working Paper Series 48523, World Bank.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Marijke Verpoorten & Lode Berlage, 2004. "Genocide and land scarcity: Can Rwandan rural households manage?," CSAE Working Paper Series 2004-15, Centre for the Study of African Economies, University of Oxford.
    2. Romain Houssa, 2004. "Monetary Union in West Africa and Asymmetric Shocks: A Dynamic Structural Factor Model," CSAE Working Paper Series 2004-17, Centre for the Study of African Economies, University of Oxford.
    3. Klasen, Stephan & Reimers, Malte, 2017. "Looking at Pro-Poor Growth from an Agricultural Perspective," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 147-168.
    4. Aragón, Fernando M. & Restuccia, Diego & Rud, Juan Pablo, 2022. "Are small farms really more productive than large farms?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    5. Fang Xia & Lingling Hou & Songqing Jin & Dongqing Li, 2020. "Land size and productivity in the livestock sector: evidence from pastoral areas in China," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 64(3), pages 867-888, July.
    6. Holden, Stein T. & Otsuka, Keijiro, 2014. "The roles of land tenure reforms and land markets in the context of population growth and land use intensification in Africa," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 88-97.
    7. Larson,Donald F. & Muraoka,Rie & Otsuka,Keijiro, 2016. "On the central role of small farms in African rural development strategies," Policy Research Working Paper Series 7710, The World Bank.
    8. Taylor, Matthew P.H. & Helfand, Steven M., 2021. "The Farm Size – Productivity Relationship in the Wake of Market Reform: An Analysis of Mexican Family Farms," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315138, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    9. Marijn Verschelde & Marijke D’Haese & Glenn Rayp & Ellen Vandamme, 2013. "Challenging Small-Scale Farming: A Non-Parametric Analysis of the (Inverse) Relationship Between Farm Productivity and Farm Size in Burundi," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 64(2), pages 319-342, June.
    10. Omotilewa, Oluwatoba J. & Jayne, T.S. & Muyanga, Milu & Aromolaran, Adebayo B. & Liverpool-Tasie, Lenis Saweda O. & Awokuse, Titus, 2021. "A revisit of farm size and productivity: Empirical evidence from a wide range of farm sizes in Nigeria," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 146(C).
    11. Desiere, Sam & Jolliffe, Dean, 2018. "Land productivity and plot size: Is measurement error driving the inverse relationship?," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 84-98.
    12. Michael Chappell & Liliana LaValle, 2011. "Food security and biodiversity: can we have both? An agroecological analysis," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 28(1), pages 3-26, February.
    13. Kimhi, Ayal, 2003. "Plot Size And Maize Productivity In Zambia: The Inverse Relationship Re-Examined," Discussion Papers 14980, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Department of Agricultural Economics and Management.
    14. Gourlay, Sydney & Kilic, Talip & Lobell, David B., 2019. "A new spin on an old debate: Errors in farmer-reported production and their implications for inverse scale - Productivity relationship in Uganda," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    15. C. S. C. Sekhar & Namrata Thapa, 2023. "Rural market imperfections in India: Revisiting old debates with new evidence," Development Policy Review, Overseas Development Institute, vol. 41(5), September.
    16. Bevis, Leah EM. & Barrett, Christopher B., 2020. "Close to the edge: High productivity at plot peripheries and the inverse size-productivity relationship," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    17. Barrett, Christopher B. & Bellemare, Marc F. & Hou, Janet Y., 2010. "Reconsidering Conventional Explanations of the Inverse Productivity-Size Relationship," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 88-97, January.
    18. Mengistu Assefa Wendimu & Arne Henningsen & Tomasz Gerard Czekaj, 2017. "Incentives and moral hazard: plot level productivity of factory-operated and outgrower-operated sugarcane production in Ethiopia," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 48(5), pages 549-560, September.
    19. Klaus Deininger & Songqing Jin & Yanyan Liu & Sudhir K Singh, 2016. "Can Labor Market Imperfections Explain Changes in the Inverse Farm Size–Productivity Relationship? Longitudinal Evidence from Rural India," Working Papers id:10987, eSocialSciences.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • O - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth
    • P - Political Economy and Comparative Economic Systems

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:csa:wpaper:2004-16. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Julia Coffey (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/csaoxuk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.