《JAE》|农业生产率增长与减贫:来自泰国的证据
摘要:人们常说,发展中国家提高农业生产率比提高其他部门的生产率更能减少贫困。这种说法经常基于偶然的理论,而不是经验证据。生产率的增长会带来额外的收入,而且必须让某人受益,尽管不一定是穷人。可以想象,大部分,甚至所有的利益可能会流向其他人。利用泰国的地区数据,我们研究了农业生产率增长和农村贫困发生率之间的关系。我们回归分析的因变量是在区域级有贫困数据的年份之间农村贫困发生率的年变化率。农业生产率以区域农业总生产率的年变化率来衡量,覆盖的时间间隔与贫困观察相同,但滞后一年。其他控制变量包括地区非农业收入和食品实际价格。农业生产率变化的估计系数为负值,非常显著,这意味着农业生产率增长确实减少了农村贫困,其他变量保持不变,尽管没有非农业收入来源的增长大。而近年来农业生产率增长对减贫的贡献很小。基于此模型,我们还分析了农业生产率增长长期驱动因素的减贫效果。
关键词:农业生产力;贫困发生率;泰国
Abstract:Raising agricultural productivity in developing countries is often said to reduce poverty more than comparable growth arising from other sectors. This claim has frequently been based on casual theorising, rather than empirical evidence. Productivity growth generates additional income and must benefit someone, though not necessarily the poor. It is conceivable that most, or even all of the benefits might go to others. Using region-level data from Thailand, we study the relationship between agricultural productivity growth and rural poverty incidence. The dependent variable for our regression analysis is the annual rate of change in rural poverty incidence at the regional level between the years for which poverty data are available. Agricultural productivity is measured as the annual rate of change in regional total agricultural productivity, covering the same time intervals as the poverty observations, but lagged one calendar year. Other control variables include regional nonagricultural incomes and the real price of food. The estimated coefficient on the change in agricultural productivity is negative and highly significant, implying that agricultural productivity growth does reduce rural poverty, holding other variables constant, though not more so than non-agricultural sources of income growth. The poverty-reducing contribution of recent agricultural productivity growth has been small. The poverty-reducing effects of long-term drivers of agricultural productivity growth are also analysed, using simulations based on the estimated model.
Keywords: agricultural productivity; poverty incidence; Thailand.
原文链接:
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1477-9552.12412
●《管理世界》| 徐志刚等:新农保与农地转出:制度性养老能替代土地养老吗?——基于家庭人口结构和流动性约束的视角
●《AE》| Hou et al:风险偏好、知识、土地整理和景观多样化对农药使用的影响
●《World Development》| He et al:农村低保项目提高农村儿童教育成果
●《JRS》| Qu et al:农村住区转型如何促进农村可持续发展?来自中国山东的证据
●《World Development》| Acosta et al:应对气候冲击:牲畜投资组合的复杂作用
●《Agribusiness》| Liang & Wang:合作社作为生猪行业的竞争标准?来自中国的证据