IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/apecpp/v35y2013i3p508-527.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Impact of Credit Constraints on Farm Households: Survey Results from India and China

Author

Listed:
  • Chandra S. Kumar
  • Calum G. Turvey
  • Jaclyn D. Kropp

Abstract

India and China have the largest farm-household populations in the world—populations that are also among the poorest. Among the many factors that affect farm livelihoods, access to credit has been identified as a significant barrier preventing the escape from poverty. While there has been significant research on credit constraints in developing countries, there is surprisingly little information pertaining to the actual impacts of credit constraints on household well-being. The objective of this paper is to investigate the impacts of credit constraints on various factors affecting farm households, such as physical and human capital formation, agricultural inputs applications, consumption smoothing, and wage-seeking behavior using direct elicitation. This paper contributes to the literature and policy debates by comparing the effects of credit constraints in China and India as surveyed in 2008–2009. The analytical results and data demonstrate that binding credit constraints adversely affect a broad range of production and livelihood choices. We empirically show that credit constraints negatively affect food consumption, farm input applications, and health and educational attainments. Copyright 2013, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Chandra S. Kumar & Calum G. Turvey & Jaclyn D. Kropp, 2013. "The Impact of Credit Constraints on Farm Households: Survey Results from India and China," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 35(3), pages 508-527.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:apecpp:v:35:y:2013:i:3:p:508-527
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/aepp/ppt002
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or

    for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    More about this item

    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:oup:apecpp:v:35:y:2013:i:3:p:508-527. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.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.