Institutional Reform in the Rural Sector with Labor and Capital Flows: Factor Income Effects, Structural Changes and Misallocations
We analyze the general equilibrium effects of a fundamental property regime transition in the rural sector - agricultural or resource - when both labor and (reproducible) capital are free to move. In contrast to manufacturing, rural production has two characteristic features: it uses a fixed natural asset (land or other natural resources) and operates under one of two property regime types: common property versus exclusive property. Common property is fundamentally characterized with sharing, thus corresponding to such institutions as the family farm (Lewis 1954), free access to resources, and collective use, but adapted for the presence of capital use. We show that labor may actually gain from being effectively forced out of the rural sector. More generally, relative factor intensities determine the factor return effects of the transition, as well as either capital or labor deepening in both sectors. And while the unit cost of effective input efforts decrease, both factors flow out of the rural sector. Under a common property regime, the agricultural productivity gaps for labor and capital are uniquely determined by the output elasticity of land.
|Date of creation:||2016|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: PO Box 450, Station A, Ottawa, Ontario, K1N 6N5|
Phone: (613) 562-5753
Fax: (613) 562-5999
Web page: http://www.socialsciences.uottawa.ca/eco/eng/index.asp
More information through EDIRC
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ott:wpaper:1606e. 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: (Diane Ritchot)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.