IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pae/wpaper/07-11.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Farm Household Labor Allocation And Hired Labor Demands In The Midwest U.S.: The Impact Of Government Payments

Author

Listed:
  • Maud ROUCAN-KANE

    ()

  • Roman KEENEY

    () (Department of Agricultural Economics, College of Agriculture, Purdue University)

Abstract

In addition to farm work, most farm households in developed countries have at least one person working off-farm. The purpose of this paper is to examine if, and how, government payments, personal characteristics and household characteristics affect labor allocation of farm operators and their spouses, and the decisions to hire labor. We estimate an 8-regime multinomial logit model and a three equation multivariate probit model to quantify these impacts. Results indicate that age of household members is consistent with the life-cycle hypothesis on increasing then decreasing labor market par, and is positively associated with demand for hired labor. Hired farm labor and off farm activities increase with the operator education levels. As household size increases, a household member is more likely to work off the farm. Increasing net worth is found to have a positive impact on probability of spouses working on the farm as well as hired labor being used. Both coupled and decoupled payments increase demand for hired labor which is consistent both with farm expansion and reduced family labor time on the farm.

Suggested Citation

  • Maud ROUCAN-KANE & Roman KEENEY, 2007. "Farm Household Labor Allocation And Hired Labor Demands In The Midwest U.S.: The Impact Of Government Payments," Working Papers 07-11, Purdue University, College of Agriculture, Department of Agricultural Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:pae:wpaper:07-11
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/bitstream/6711/2/wp070011.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Shelly Lundberg, 2005. "Sons, Daughters, and Parental Behaviour," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 21(3), pages 340-356, Autumn.
    2. Nobuhiko FUWA & Seiro ITO & Kensuke KUBO & Takashi KUROSAKI & Yasuyuki SAWADA, 2006. "Introduction To A Study Of Intrahousehold Resource Allocation And Gender Discrimination In Rural Andhra Pradesh, India," The Developing Economies, Institute of Developing Economies, vol. 44(4), pages 375-397.
    3. Benjamin, Dwayne, 1992. "Household Composition, Labor Markets, and Labor Demand: Testing for Separation in Agricultural Household Models," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(2), pages 287-322, March.
    4. Doss, Cheryl R. & Morris, Michael L., 2001. "How does gender affect the adoption of agricultural innovations?: The case of improved maize technology in Ghana," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 25(1), pages 27-39, June.
    5. Borooah, Vani K., 2004. "Gender bias among children in India in their diet and immunisation against disease," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 58(9), pages 1719-1731, May.
    6. Deaton, Angus S & Ruiz-Castillo, Javier & Thomas, Duncan, 1989. "The Influence of Household Composition on Household Expenditure Patterns: Theory and Spanish Evidence," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 97(1), pages 179-200, February.
    7. Rosenzweig, Mark R & Schultz, T Paul, 1982. "Market Opportunities, Genetic Endowments, and Intrafamily Resource Distribution: Child Survival in Rural India," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(4), pages 803-815, September.
    8. Jere R. Behrman & Anil B. Deolalikar, 1990. "The Intrahousehold Demand for Nutrients in Rural South India: Individual Estimates, Fixed Effects, and Permanent Income," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 25(4), pages 665-696.
    9. Quisumbing, Agnes R. & Haddad, Lawrence James & Peña, Christine, 1995. "Gender and poverty," FCND discussion papers 9, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    10. Shelly Lundberg & Elaina Rose, 2002. "The Effects Of Sons And Daughters On Men'S Labor Supply And Wages," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 84(2), pages 251-268, May.
    11. de Janvry, Alain & Fafchamps, Marcel & Sadoulet, Elisabeth, 1991. "Peasant Household Behaviour with Missing Markets: Some Paradoxes Explained," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 101(409), pages 1400-1417, November.
    12. Anderson, S., 1999. "The Economics of Dowry Payments in Pakistan," Department of Economics - Working Papers Series 691, The University of Melbourne.
    13. Behrman, Jere R, 1988. "Intrahousehold Allocation of Nutrients in Rural India: Are Boys Favored? Do Parents Exhibit Inequality Aversion?," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 40(1), pages 32-54, March.
    14. Deaton, Angus S, 1989. "Looking for Boy-Girl Discrimination in Household Expenditure Data," World Bank Economic Review, World Bank Group, vol. 3(1), pages 1-15, January.
    15. Rose, Elaina, 2000. "Gender Bias, Credit Constraints and Time Allocation in Rural India," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 110(465), pages 738-758, July.
    16. Shelley Clark, 2000. "Son preference and sex composition of children: Evidence from india," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 37(1), pages 95-108, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    government subsidies; government programs; time allocation; labor allocation; off-farm labor; farm labor; hired labor;

    JEL classification:

    • J22 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demand and Supply of Labor - - - Time Allocation and Labor Supply
    • Q12 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Micro Analysis of Farm Firms, Farm Households, and Farm Input Markets
    • Q18 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Policy; Food Policy

    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:pae:wpaper:07-11. 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: (Debby Weber). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/dapurus.html .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.