IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jafrec/v28y2019i4p435-454..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Tied Labour, Savings and Rural Labour Market Wages: Evidence from a Framed Field Experiment

Author

Listed:
  • Aisha Nanyiti
  • Haki Pamuk
  • Erwin Bulte

Abstract

How does the introduction of tied labour or a saving product affect labour market decisions and wages in rural agricultural labour markets? We develop a theoretical model of labour tying that incorporates diminishing marginal returns to consumption and inequality (behindness) aversion in the context of a rural agricultural labour market with seasonally fluctuating demand for labour, and test model predictions using a framed field experiment (modified ultimatum game) in rural Uganda. Our main findings are that (1) wages fluctuate with productivity, (2) access to tied contracts decreases wages for casual labour and (3) access to a saving technology does not improve wages for tied labour. Consistent with model predictions and earlier theory, we empirically find that income for workers goes down (and income for landlords goes up) if an institutional innovation enables consumption smoothing by workers (tied contracts or a saving technology).

Suggested Citation

  • Aisha Nanyiti & Haki Pamuk & Erwin Bulte, 2019. "Tied Labour, Savings and Rural Labour Market Wages: Evidence from a Framed Field Experiment," Journal of African Economies, Centre for the Study of African Economies, vol. 28(4), pages 435-454.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:jafrec:v:28:y:2019:i:4:p:435-454.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/jae/ejz004
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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:jafrec:v:28:y:2019:i:4:p:435-454.. 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/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.