IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wbk/wbrwps/6190.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Should African rural development strategies depend on smallholder farms ? an exploration of the inverse productivity hypothesis

Author

Listed:
  • Larson, Donald F.
  • Otsuka, Keijiro
  • Matsumoto, Tomoya
  • Kilic, Talip

Abstract

In Africa, most development strategies include efforts to improve the productivity of staple crops grown on smallholder farms. An underlying premise is that small farms are productive in the African context and that smallholders do not forgo economies of scale -- a premise supported by the often observed phenomenon that staple cereal yields decline as the scale of production increases. This paper explores a research design conundrum that encourages researchers who study the relationship between productivity and scale to use surveys with a narrow geographic reach, when policy would be better served with studies based on wide and heterogeneous settings. Using a model of endogenous technology choice, the authors explore the relationship between maize yields and scale using alternative data. Since rich descriptions of the decision environments that farmers face are needed to identify the applied technologies that generate the data, improvements in the location specificity of the data should reduce the likelihood of identification errors and biased estimates. However, the analysis finds that the inverse productivity hypothesis holds up well across a broad platform of data, despite obvious shortcomings with some components. It also finds surprising consistency in the estimated scale elasticities.

Suggested Citation

  • Larson, Donald F. & Otsuka, Keijiro & Matsumoto, Tomoya & Kilic, Talip, 2012. "Should African rural development strategies depend on smallholder farms ? an exploration of the inverse productivity hypothesis," Policy Research Working Paper Series 6190, The World Bank.
  • Handle: RePEc:wbk:wbrwps:6190
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2012/09/06/000158349_20120906083355/Rendered/PDF/wps6190.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hazell, Peter & Poulton, Colin & Wiggins, Steve & Dorward, Andrew, 2010. "The Future of Small Farms: Trajectories and Policy Priorities," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 38(10), pages 1349-1361, October.
    2. Michael R. Carter & Keith D. Wiebe, 1990. "Access to Capital and Its Impact on Agrarian Structure and Productivity in Kenya," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 72(5), pages 1146-1150.
    3. Amartya K. Sen, 1966. "Peasants and Dualism with or without Surplus Labor," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74, pages 425-425.
    4. Beegle, Kathleen & De Weerdt, Joachim & Friedman, Jed & Gibson, John, 2012. "Methods of household consumption measurement through surveys: Experimental results from Tanzania," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(1), pages 3-18.
    5. Martin Ravallion & Shaohua Chen & Prem Sangraula, 2007. "New Evidence on the Urbanization of Global Poverty," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 33(4), pages 667-701.
    6. Barrett, Christopher B. & Bellemare, Marc F. & Hou, Janet Y., 2010. "Reconsidering Conventional Explanations of the Inverse Productivity-Size Relationship," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 88-97, January.
    7. Donald F. Larson & Mauricio León, 2006. "How Endowments, Accumulations, and Choice Determine the Geography of Agricultural Productivity in Ecuador," World Bank Economic Review, World Bank Group, vol. 20(3), pages 449-471.
    8. Michael Lipton, 2006. "Can Small Farmers Survive, Prosper, or be the Key Channel to Cut Mass Poverty?," The Electronic Journal of Agricultural and Development Economics, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, vol. 3(1), pages 58-85.
    9. Taslim, M A, 1989. "Supervision Problems and the Size-Productivity Relation in Bangladesh Agriculture," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 51(1), pages 55-71, February.
    10. Hausman, Jerry, 2015. "Specification tests in econometrics," Applied Econometrics, Publishing House "SINERGIA PRESS", vol. 38(2), pages 112-134.
    11. Benjamin, Dwayne, 1995. "Can unobserved land quality explain the inverse productivity relationship?," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 51-84, February.
    12. Larson, Donald & Mundlak, Yair, 1997. "On the Intersectoral Migration of Agricultural Labor," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 45(2), pages 295-319, January.
    13. Carletto, Calogero & Savastano, Sara & Zezza, Alberto, 2013. "Fact or artifact: The impact of measurement errors on the farm size–productivity relationship," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 254-261.
    14. Yotopoulos, Pan A & Lau, Lawrence J, 1973. "A Test for Relative Economic Efficiency: Some Further Results," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 63(1), pages 214-223, March.
    15. John M. Antle, 1983. "Sequential Decision Making in Production Models," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 65(2), pages 282-290.
    16. Mundlak, Yair & Butzer, Rita & Larson, Donald F., 2012. "Heterogeneous technology and panel data: The case of the agricultural production function," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(1), pages 139-149.
    17. Michael Kevane, 1996. "Agrarian Structure and Agricultural Practice: Typology and Application to Western Sudan," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 78(1), pages 236-245.
    18. Lamb, Russell L., 2003. "Inverse productivity: land quality, labor markets, and measurement error," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(1), pages 71-95, June.
    19. Deininger, Klaus & Byerlee, Derek, 2012. "The Rise of Large Farms in Land Abundant Countries: Do They Have a Future?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 701-714.
    20. Binswanger, Hans P., 1991. "Brazilian policies that encourage deforestation in the Amazon," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 19(7), pages 821-829, July.
    21. Binswanger, Hans P & McIntire, John, 1987. "Behavioral and Material Determinants of Production Relations in Land-Abundant Tropical Agriculture," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 36(1), pages 73-99, October.
    22. Ayal Kimhi, 2006. "Plot size and maize productivity in Zambia: is there an inverse relationship?," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 35(1), pages 1-9, July.
    23. Assunção, Juliano & Braido, Luis H.B., 2007. "AJAE Appendix: Testing Household-Specific Explanations for the Inverse Productivity Relationship," American Journal of Agricultural Economics Appendices, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 89(4), November.
    24. Anil B. Deolalikar, 1981. "The Inverse Relationship between Productivity and Farm Size: A Test Using Regional Data from India," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 63(2), pages 275-279.
    25. Ivanic, Maros & Martin, Will & Zaman, Hassan, 2012. "Estimating the Short-Run Poverty Impacts of the 2010–11 Surge in Food Prices," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 40(11), pages 2302-2317.
    26. Bardhan, Pranab K, 1973. "Size, Productivity, and Returns to Scale: An Analysis of Farm-Level Data in Indian Agriculture," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 81(6), pages 1370-1386, Nov.-Dec..
    27. repec:adr:anecst:y:1999:i:55-56:p:19 is not listed on IDEAS
    28. Bhalla, Surjit S & Roy, Prannoy L, 1988. "Mis-specification in Farm Productivity Analysis: The Role of Land Quality," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 40(1), pages 55-73, March.
    29. Deininger, Klaus & Feder, Gershon, 2001. "Land institutions and land markets," Handbook of Agricultural Economics,in: B. L. Gardner & G. C. Rausser (ed.), Handbook of Agricultural Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 6, pages 288-331 Elsevier.
    30. Mundlak, Yair, 1993. "On the Empirical Aspects of Economic Growth Theory," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 83(2), pages 415-420, May.
    31. Eicher, Carl K. & Baker, Doyle Curtis, 1982. "Research on Agricultural Development in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Critical Survey," Food Security International Development Papers 54071, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    32. Carter, Michael R, 1984. "Identification of the Inverse Relationship between Farm Size and Productivity: An Empirical Analysis of Peasant Agricultural Production," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 36(1), pages 131-145, March.
    33. Yair Mundlak & Donald F. Larson & Rita Butzer, 1999. "Rethinking Within and Between Regressions: The Case of Agricultural Production Functions," Annals of Economics and Statistics, GENES, issue 55-56, pages 475-501.
    34. Heltberg, Rasmus, 1998. "Rural market imperfections and the farm size-- productivity relationship: Evidence from Pakistan," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 26(10), pages 1807-1826, October.
    35. Feder, Gershon, 1985. "The relation between farm size and farm productivity : The role of family labor, supervision and credit constraints," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2-3), pages 297-313, August.
    36. Barrett, Christopher B., 1996. "On price risk and the inverse farm size-productivity relationship," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 193-215, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Crops&Crop Management Systems; Climate Change and Agriculture; Rural Development Knowledge&Information Systems; Economic Theory&Research; Labor Policies;

    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:wbk:wbrwps:6190. 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: (Roula I. Yazigi). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/dvewbus.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.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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.