IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Missing(ness) in action : selectivity bias in GPS-based land area measurements


  • Kilic, Talip
  • Zezza, Alberto
  • Carletto, Calogero
  • Savastano, Sara


Land area is a fundamental component of agricultural statistics, and of analyses undertaken by agricultural economists. While household surveys in developing countries have traditionally relied on farmers'own, potentially error-prone, land area assessments, the availability of affordable and reliable Global Positioning System (GPS) units has made GPS-based area measurement a practical alternative. Nonetheless, in an attempt to reduce costs, keep interview durations within reasonable limits, and avoid the difficulty of asking respondents to accompany interviewers to distant plots, survey implementing agencies typically require interviewers to record GPS-based area measurements only for plots within a given radius of dwelling locations. It is, therefore, common for as much as a third of the sample plots not to be measured, and research has not shed light on the possible selection bias in analyses relying on partial data due to gaps in GPS-based area measures. This paper explores the patterns of missingness in GPS-based plot areas, and investigates their implications for land productivity estimates and the inverse scale-land productivity relationship. Using Multiple Imputation (MI) to predict missing GPS-based plot areas in nationally-representative survey data from Uganda and Tanzania, the paper highlights the potential of MI in reliably simulating the missing data, and confirms the existence of an inverse scale-land productivity relationship, which is strengthened by using the complete, multiply-imputed dataset. The study demonstrates the usefulness of judiciously reconstructed GPS-based areas in alleviating concerns over potential measurement error in farmer-reported areas, and with regards to systematic bias in plot selection for GPS-based area measurement.

Suggested Citation

  • Kilic, Talip & Zezza, Alberto & Carletto, Calogero & Savastano, Sara, 2013. "Missing(ness) in action : selectivity bias in GPS-based land area measurements," Policy Research Working Paper Series 6490, The World Bank.
  • Handle: RePEc:wbk:wbrwps:6490

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Mary Ahearn & David Banker & Dawn Marie Clay & Daniel Milkove, 2011. "Comparative Survey Imputation Methods for Farm Household Income," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 93(2), pages 613-618.
    2. Scheuren, Fritz, 2005. "Multiple Imputation: How It Began and Continues," The American Statistician, American Statistical Association, vol. 59, pages 315-319, November.
    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. Dwayne Benjamin & Loren Brandt, 2002. "Property rights, labour markets, and efficiency in a transition economy: the case of rural China," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 35(4), pages 689-716, November.
    5. 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.
    6. Nkonya, Ephraim M. & Pender, John L. & Jagger, Pamela & Sserunkuuma, Dick & Kaizzi, Crammer & Ssali, Henry, 2004. "Strategies for sustainable land management and poverty reduction in Uganda:," Research reports 133, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    7. Eswaran, Mukesh & Kotwal, Ashok, 1986. "Access to Capital and Agrarian Production Organisation," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 96(382), pages 482-498, June.
    8. Eswaran, Mukesh & Kotwal, Ashok, 1985. "A Theory of Contractual Structure in Agriculture," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(3), pages 352-367, June.
    9. Benjamin, Dwayne, 1995. "Can unobserved land quality explain the inverse productivity relationship?," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 51-84, February.
    10. 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.
    11. 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.
    12. Michael W. Robbins & T. Kirk White, 2011. "Farm Commodity Payments and Imputation in the Agricultural Resource Management Survey," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 93(2), pages 606-612.
    13. Eastwood, Robert & Lipton, Michael & Newell, Andrew, 2010. "Farm Size," Handbook of Agricultural Economics, Elsevier.
    14. Schenker, Nathaniel & Raghunathan, Trivellore E. & Chiu, Pei-Lu & Makuc, Diane M. & Zhang, Guangyu & Cohen, Alan J., 2006. "Multiple Imputation of Missing Income Data in the National Health Interview Survey," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 101, pages 924-933, September.
    15. 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.
    16. 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.
    17. Binswanger, Hans P. & Deininger, Klaus & Feder, Gershon, 1995. "Power, distortions, revolt and reform in agricultural land relations," Handbook of Development Economics,in: Hollis Chenery & T.N. Srinivasan (ed.), Handbook of Development Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 42, pages 2659-2772 Elsevier.
    18. Kobi Abayomi & Andrew Gelman & Marc Levy, 2008. "Diagnostics for multivariate imputations," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 57(3), pages 273-291.
    19. Claire Vermaak, 2012. "Tracking poverty with coarse data: evidence from South Africa," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 10(2), pages 239-265, June.
    20. Schenker, Nathaniel & Taylor, Jeremy M. G., 1996. "Partially parametric techniques for multiple imputation," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 22(4), pages 425-446, August.
    21. Donald F. Larson & Keijiro Otsuka & Tomoya Matsumoto & Talip Kilic, 2014. "Should African rural development strategies depend on smallholder farms? An exploration of the inverse-productivity hypothesis," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 45(3), pages 355-367, May.
    22. Lau, Lawrence J & Yotopoulos, Pan A, 1971. "A Test for Relative Efficiency and Application to Indian Agriculture," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 61(1), pages 94-109, March.
    23. Calogero Carletto & Sydney Gourlay & Paul Winters, 2015. "Editor's choice From Guesstimates to GPStimates: Land Area Measurement and Implications for Agricultural Analysis," Journal of African Economies, Centre for the Study of African Economies (CSAE), vol. 24(5), pages 593-628.
    24. Sarthak Gaurav & Srijit Mishra, 2015. "Farm Size and Returns to Cultivation in India: Revisiting an Old Debate," Oxford Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(2), pages 165-193, June.
    25. Zaibet, Lokman T & Dunn, Elizabeth G, 1998. "Land Tenure, Farm Size, and Rural Market Participation in Developing Countries: The Case of the Tunisian Olive Sector," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 46(4), pages 831-848, July.
    26. 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.
    27. J.-F. Levesque & S. Mukherjee & D. Grimard & A. Boivin & S. Mishra, 2013. "Measuring the prevalence of chronic diseases using population surveys by pooling self-reported symptoms, diagnosis and treatments: results from the World Health Survey of 2003 for South Asia," International Journal of Public Health, Springer;Swiss School of Public Health (SSPH+), vol. 58(3), pages 435-447, June.
    28. De Groote, Hugo & Traore, Oumar, 2005. "The cost of accuracy in crop area estimation," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 84(1), pages 21-38, April.
    29. 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.
    30. 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.
    31. 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.
    32. Assuncao, Juliano J. & Ghatak, Maitreesh, 2003. "Can unobserved heterogeneity in farmer ability explain the inverse relationship between farm size and productivity," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 80(2), pages 189-194, August.
    33. Kelly, Valerie A. & Donovan, Cynthia, 2008. "Agricultural Statistics in Sub-Saharan Africa: Differences in Institutional Arrangements and their Impacts on Agricultural Statistics Systems. A Synthesis of Four Country Case Studies," Food Security International Development Working Papers 54558, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


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

    Cited by:

    1. Florence Kondylis & Valerie Mueller & S. Zhu, 2015. "Measuring agricultural knowledge and adoption," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 46(3), pages 449-462, May.
    2. Calogero Carletto & Dean Jolliffe & Raka Banerjee, 2015. "From Tragedy to Renaissance: Improving Agricultural Data for Better Policies," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 51(2), pages 133-148, February.
    3. Brown, Annette N. & Wood, Benjamin Douglas Kuflick, 2017. "Which tests not witch hunts: a diagnostic approach for conducting replication research," Economics Discussion Papers 2017-77, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW).
    4. Deininger,Klaus W. & Xia,Fang & Savastano,Sara, 2015. "Smallholders? land ownership and access in Sub-Saharan Africa: a new landscape ?," Policy Research Working Paper Series 7285, The World Bank.
    5. repec:spr:ssefpa:v:9:y:2017:i:6:d:10.1007_s12571-017-0735-6 is not listed on IDEAS

    More about this item


    E-Business; Statistical&Mathematical Sciences; Economic Theory&Research; Science Education; Scientific Research&Science Parks;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    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:6490. 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: .

    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.