Missing(ness) in action : selectivity bias in GPS-based land area measurements
AbstractLand area is a fundamental component of agricultural statistics, and of analyses undertaken by agricultural economists. While household surveys in developing countries have traditionally relied on farmers'own, potentially error-prone, land area assessments, the availability of affordable and reliable Global Positioning System (GPS) units has made GPS-based area measurement a practical alternative. Nonetheless, in an attempt to reduce costs, keep interview durations within reasonable limits, and avoid the difficulty of asking respondents to accompany interviewers to distant plots, survey implementing agencies typically require interviewers to record GPS-based area measurements only for plots within a given radius of dwelling locations. It is, therefore, common for as much as a third of the sample plots not to be measured, and research has not shed light on the possible selection bias in analyses relying on partial data due to gaps in GPS-based area measures. This paper explores the patterns of missingness in GPS-based plot areas, and investigates their implications for land productivity estimates and the inverse scale-land productivity relationship. Using Multiple Imputation (MI) to predict missing GPS-based plot areas in nationally-representative survey data from Uganda and Tanzania, the paper highlights the potential of MI in reliably simulating the missing data, and confirms the existence of an inverse scale-land productivity relationship, which is strengthened by using the complete, multiply-imputed dataset. The study demonstrates the usefulness of judiciously reconstructed GPS-based areas in alleviating concerns over potential measurement error in farmer-reported areas, and with regards to systematic bias in plot selection for GPS-based area measurement.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. 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.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by The World Bank in its series Policy Research Working Paper Series with number 6490.
Date of creation: 01 Jun 2013
Date of revision:
E-Business; Statistical&Mathematical Sciences; Economic Theory&Research; Science Education; Scientific Research&Science Parks;
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-AFR-2013-06-24 (Africa)
- NEP-AGR-2013-06-24 (Agricultural Economics)
- NEP-ALL-2013-06-24 (All new papers)
- NEP-DEV-2013-06-24 (Development)
- NEP-EFF-2013-06-24 (Efficiency & Productivity)
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.:
- Assuncao, Juliano J. & Ghatak, Maitreesh, 2003. "Can unobserved heterogeneity in farmer ability explain the inverse relationship between farm size and productivity," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 80(2), pages 189-194, August.
- Larson, Donald F. & Otsuka, Keijiro & Matsumoto, Tomoya & Kilic, Talip, 2012. "Should African rural development strategies depend on smallholder farms ? an exploration of the inverse productivity hypothesis," Policy Research Working Paper Series 6190, The World Bank.
- Carletto, Calogero & Savastano, Sara & Zezza, Alberto, 2013.
"Fact or artifact: The impact of measurement errors on the farm size–productivity relationship,"
Journal of Development Economics,
Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 254-261.
- Carletto, Calogero & Savastano, Sara & Zezza, Alberto, 2011. "Fact or artefact : the impact of measurement errors on the farm size - productivity relationship," Policy Research Working Paper Series 5908, The World Bank.
- Binswanger, Hans P. & Deininger, Klaus & Feder, Gershon, 1995.
"Power, distortions, revolt and reform in agricultural land relations,"
Handbook of Development Economics,
in: Hollis Chenery & T.N. Srinivasan (ed.), Handbook of Development Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 42, pages 2659-2772
- Binswanger, Hans P. & Deininger, Klaus & Feder, Gershon, 1993. "Power, distortions, revolt, and reform in agricultural land relations," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1164, The World Bank.
- Christopher B. Barrett & Marc F. Bellemare & Janet Y. Hou, 2010.
"Reconsidering Conventional Explanations of the Inverse Productivity-Size Relationship,"
10-22, Duke University, Department of Economics.
- 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.
- Dwayne Benjamin & Loren Brandt, 2002.
"Property rights, labour markets, and efficiency in a transition economy: the case of rural China,"
Canadian Journal of Economics,
Canadian Economics Association, vol. 35(4), pages 689-716, November.
- Dwayne Benjamin & Loren Brandt, 2000. "Property Rights, Labor Markets, and Efficiency in a Transition Economy: The Case of Rural China," Working Papers benjamin-00-02, University of Toronto, Department of Economics.
- Loren Brandt & Dwayne Benjamin, 2002. "Property Rights, Labour Markets, and Efficiency in a Transition Economy: The Case of Rural China," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series 518, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.
- Kelly, Valerie A. & Donovan, Cynthia, 2008. "Agricultural Statistics in Sub-Saharan Africa: Differences in Institutional Arrangements and their Impacts on Agricultural Statistics Systems. A Synthesis of Four Country Case Studies," Food Security International Development Working Papers 54558, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
- Bhalla, Surjit S & Roy, Prannoy L, 1988. "Mis-specification in Farm Productivity Analysis: The Role of Land Quality," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 40(1), pages 55-73, March.
- Michael Kevane, 1996. "Agrarian Structure and Agricultural Practice: Typology and Application to Western Sudan," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 78(1), pages 236-245.
- Benjamin, Dwayne, 1995. "Can unobserved land quality explain the inverse productivity relationship?," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 51-84, February.
- Nkonya, Ephraim M. & Pender, John L. & Jagger, Pamela & Sserunkuuma, Dick & Kaizzi, Crammer & Ssali, Henry, 2004. "Strategies for sustainable land management and poverty reduction in Uganda:," Research reports 133, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
- Carter, Michael R, 1984. "Identification of the Inverse Relationship between Farm Size and Productivity: An Empirical Analysis of Peasant Agricultural Production," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 36(1), pages 131-45, March.
- Schenker, Nathaniel & Raghunathan, Trivellore E. & Chiu, Pei-Lu & Makuc, Diane M. & Zhang, Guangyu & Cohen, Alan J., 2006. "Multiple Imputation of Missing Income Data in the National Health Interview Survey," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 101, pages 924-933, September.
- Mary Ahearn & David Banker & Dawn Marie Clay & Daniel Milkove, 2011. "Comparative Survey Imputation Methods for Farm Household Income," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 93(2), pages 613-618.
- Eswaran, Mukesh & Kotwal, Ashok, 1985. "A Theory of Contractual Structure in Agriculture," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(3), pages 352-67, June.
- Michael W. Robbins & T. Kirk White, 2011. "Farm Commodity Payments and Imputation in the Agricultural Resource Management Survey," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 93(2), pages 606-612.
- 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.
- Yotopoulos, Pan A & Lau, Lawrence J, 1973. "A Test for Relative Economic Efficiency: Some Further Results," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 63(1), pages 214-23, March.
- Schenker, Nathaniel & Taylor, Jeremy M. G., 1996. "Partially parametric techniques for multiple imputation," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 22(4), pages 425-446, August.
- Lau, Lawrence J & Yotopoulos, Pan A, 1971. "A Test for Relative Efficiency and Application to Indian Agriculture," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 61(1), pages 94-109, March.
- Claire Vermaak, 2012. "Tracking poverty with coarse data: evidence from South Africa," Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 239-265, June.
- Scheuren, Fritz, 2005. "Multiple Imputation: How It Began and Continues," The American Statistician, American Statistical Association, vol. 59, pages 315-319, November.
- 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.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Roula I. Yazigi).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.