IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Food versus Cash. Development Theory and Reality in Northern Côte d’Ivoire

Listed author(s):
  • Matty Demont
  • Johan Stessens

In the literature on the evolution of farming systems in Sub-Saharan Africa, the food versus cash debate on the competition versus complementarity between food and export crops (such as cotton) in agricultural development seems to offer contrasting views on rural development. The purpose of the present study is to revisit these schools of thought through an empirical case study in northern Côte d’Ivoire. Farming systems are distinguished through the presence of cotton and the degree of intensification and mechanization. Non-mechanized cotton systems are severely constrained by labour bottlenecks during field preparation of cotton fields due to competition with food crops and are barely able to subsist. Mechanization, as part of the cotton program, enables cotton farms to spread labour peaks and dramatically increase cropped areas. Our findings suggest that both development theories in reality coexist rather than contrast and that neither of both simultaneously applies on all farming systems.

If 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.

File URL:
Download Restriction: no

Article provided by KU Leuven, Faculty of Economics and Business, Review of Business and Economic Literature in its journal Review of Business and Economic Literature.

Volume (Year): LIV (2009)
Issue (Month): 3 ()
Pages: 258-272

in new window

Handle: RePEc:ete:revbec:20090303
Contact details of provider: Postal:
Naamsestraat 69, 3000 Leuven

Web page:

More information through EDIRC

No references listed on IDEAS
You can help add them by filling out this form.

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ete:revbec:20090303. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (library EBIB)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.