IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hhs/nlsclt/2025_004.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Missing Parcels and Farm Size Measurement Error: Do Nationally Representative Surveys Provide Reliable Estimates?

Author

Listed:
  • Holden, Stein T.

    (Centre for Land Tenure Studies, Norwegian University of Life Sciences)

  • Makate, Clifton

    (Centre for Land Tenure Studies, Norwegian University of Life Sciences)

  • Tione, Sarah

    (Centre for Land Tenure Studies, Norwegian University of Life Sciences)

Abstract

We assess the reliability of measured farm sizes (ownership holdings) in the Living Standard Measurement Study – Integrated Surveys on Agriculture (LSMS-ISA) in Ethiopia and Malawi based on three survey rounds (2012, 2014, 2016) in Ethiopia and four rounds (2010, 2013, 2016, 2019) in Malawi. Using the balanced panel of households that participated in all the rounds, we utilized the within-household variation in reported and measured ownership holdings that were mostly measured with GPSs and/or rope and compass. While this gives reliable measures of reported holdings, we detect substantial under-reporting of parcels over time within households that largely have been overlooked in previous studies. The problem causes an unrecognized bias in agricultural statistics. We find that the estimated farm sizes within survey rounds are substantially downward biased due to systematic and stochastic under-reporting of parcels. Such biases are substantial in the data from both countries, in all survey rounds, and in all regions of each country. We estimate models with alternative estimators for the ownership holding share of maximum within-household holding to examine factors associated with variation in reported farm sizes. Based on the analyses, we propose that the maximum within-household reported farm sizes over several survey rounds provide a more reliable proxy for the real farm size, as these maximum sizes are less likely to be biased due to parcel attrition. The ignorance of this non-classical measurement error is associated with a downward bias of 12-41% in average and median farm sizes and an upward bias in the Gini coefficients for farm size distributions. We propose ideas for follow-up research and improvements in collecting these data types and draw relevant policy implications.

Suggested Citation

  • Holden, Stein T. & Makate, Clifton & Tione, Sarah, 2025. "Missing Parcels and Farm Size Measurement Error: Do Nationally Representative Surveys Provide Reliable Estimates?," CLTS Working Papers 4/25, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Centre for Land Tenure Studies.
  • Handle: RePEc:hhs:nlsclt:2025_004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://main-bvxea6i-kdsvgmpf4iwws.eu-5.platformsh.site/sites/default/files/2025-06/CLTS_WP_04_25_full.pdf
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Farm size measurement; plot attrition; measurement error; LSMS-ISA; Ethiopia; Malawi;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C81 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - Methodology for Collecting, Estimating, and Organizing Microeconomic Data; Data Access
    • C83 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - Survey Methods; Sampling Methods
    • Q12 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Micro Analysis of Farm Firms, Farm Households, and Farm Input Markets
    • Q15 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Land Ownership and Tenure; Land Reform; Land Use; Irrigation; Agriculture and Environment

    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:hhs:nlsclt:2025_004. 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: Sarah Ephrida Tione (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ioumbno.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.