IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/22628.html

Heterogeneous Impact Dynamics of a Rural Business Development Program in Nicaragua

Author

Listed:
  • Michael R. Carter
  • Emilia Tjernström
  • Patricia Toledo

Abstract

We study the impacts of a rural development program designed to boost the income of the smallfarm sector in Nicaragua. Exploiting the random assignment of treatment, we find statistically and economically significant impacts on gross farm income and investment in productive farm capital. Using continuous treatment estimation techniques, we examine the evolution of program impacts over time and find that the estimated income increase persists and that the impacts on productive capital stock continue to rise even after the program concluded. Additionally, panel quantile methods reveal striking heterogeneity of program impacts on both income and investment. We show that this heterogeneity is not random and that there appear to exist low-performing household types who benefit little from the program, whereas high-performing (upper quantile) households benefit more substantially. Analysis using generalized random forests, a machine learning algorithm, points toward greater program impacts for households who were disadvantaged at baseline. Even after controlling for this source of heterogeneity, we find large and persistent differences in how much different types of households benefited from the program. While the benefit-cost ratio of the program is on average positive, the impact heterogeneity suggests that business development programs aiming to engage farm households as agricultural entrepreneurs have limitations as instruments to eliminate rural poverty.

Suggested Citation

  • Michael R. Carter & Emilia Tjernström & Patricia Toledo, 2016. "Heterogeneous Impact Dynamics of a Rural Business Development Program in Nicaragua," NBER Working Papers 22628, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:22628
    Note: DEV
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w22628.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Fu, Changluan & Sun, Xinyue & Guo, Mengting & Yu, Chenyang, 2024. "Can digital inclusive finance facilitate productive investment in rural households?–An empirical study based on the China Household Finance Survey," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 61(C).
    2. Kayo Murakami & Hideki Shimada & Yoshiaki Ushifusa & Takanori Ida, 2022. "Heterogeneous Treatment Effects Of Nudge And Rebate: Causal Machine Learning In A Field Experiment On Electricity Conservation," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 63(4), pages 1779-1803, November.
    3. Mullally, Conner & Chakravarty, Shourish, 2018. "Are matching funds for smallholder irrigation money well spent?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 70-80.
    4. Simon Briole & Augustin Colette & Emmanuelle Lavaine, 2023. "The Heterogeneous Effects of Lockdown Policies on Air Pollution," Post-Print hal-04217143, HAL.
    5. Sabahi, Sima & Parast, Mahour Mellat, 2020. "The impact of entrepreneurship orientation on project performance: A machine learning approach," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 226(C).
    6. Kuijpers, Rob, 2020. "Integrated Value Chain Development: Evidence from Bangladesh," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    7. Ebata, Ayako & Hernandez, Manuel A., 2017. "Linking smallholder farmers to markets on extensive and intensive margins: Evidence from Nicaragua☆," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 34-44.
    8. Márton Gosztonyi & Csákné Filep Judit, 2022. "Profiling (Non-)Nascent Entrepreneurs in Hungary Based on Machine Learning Approaches," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-20, March.
    9. Olha Aleksandrova & Štefan Bojnec, 2025. "Impact of the adoption of chemical inputs on crop yield downside risk," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 71(10), pages 527-536.
    10. Zhong Liu & Zuanjiu Zhou, 2022. "Rural centralized residence and labor migration: Evidence from China," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(4), pages 1592-1608, December.
    11. Barrett, Christopher B. & Carter, Michael R., 2020. "Finding our balance? Revisiting the randomization revolution in development economics ten years further on," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    12. Christian Stetter & Philipp Mennig & Johannes Sauer, 2022. "Using Machine Learning to Identify Heterogeneous Impacts of Agri-Environment Schemes in the EU: A Case Study," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 49(4), pages 723-759.
    13. Dorothee Weiffen & Ghassan Baliki & Tilman Brück, 2022. "Violent conflict moderates food security impacts of agricultural asset transfers in Syria: A heterogeneity analysis using machine learning," HiCN Working Papers 381, Households in Conflict Network.
    14. repec:lic:licosd:41419 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Joshua W. Deutschmann & Maya Duru & Kim Siegal & Emilia Tjernström, 2019. "Can Smallholder Extension Transform African Agriculture?," NBER Working Papers 26054, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • I32 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty - - - Measurement and Analysis of Poverty
    • O12 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Microeconomic Analyses of Economic Development
    • O13 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Agriculture; Natural Resources; Environment; Other Primary Products
    • Q12 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Micro Analysis of Farm Firms, Farm Households, and Farm Input Markets
    • Q13 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Markets and Marketing; Cooperatives; Agribusiness

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:nbr:nberwo:22628. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.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.