Consumption inequality between farm and nonfarm households in Taiwan: a decomposition analysis of differences in distribution

Consumption has been recognized as a more reliable indicator of household well‐being than income. Although a considerable body of literature has examined income inequality between farm and nonfarm households, little is known about inequality in consumption. This research aims to fill this knowledge gap by investigating consumption disparity between farm and nonfarm households. Using a nationally representative household survey from Taiwan, we apply an unconditional quantile regression‐based decomposition method to decompose the differences in the distribution of household expenditure between these farm and nonfarm households. The results indicate that differences in the observed characteristics between these two types of households explain most of the consumption inequality. Moreover, the difference in the education level of the farm operator, household income, and the degree of urbanization are particularly important.     

Does participation in the conservation reserve program impact the economic well‐being of farm households?

This study uses U.S. farm household survey data to examine how participation in the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) affects farm household economic well-being. Further, the study also examines the effects of CRP participation on farm household consumption, income, and imputed savings. In contrast to previous studies that assume the relationships are homogenous across the population, quantile regression is used to investigate the association between CRP participation across the entire distribution of farm household consumption and income. Empirical findings suggest that the effect of CRP participation on household economic well-being differs across the income and consumption distribution. For households in the lower percentiles of the distribution, the CRP participation is associated with an increase in household consumption, but a decrease in farm household income and savings. In contrast, farm households at the median and higher income and consumption quantiles, participation in CRP is associated with lower levels of household consumption and income, but with higher levels of savings.     

ECONOMIC ASPECTS OF FARM POVERTY

The results of the Henderson Poverty Inquiry's 1973 farm household income survey are discussed and supplemented by income distributions based on taxation returns from 1968/69 to 1972/73. It is concluded that much low income 'poverty' is temporary, being the product of the instability of agriculture. A case is made for the inclusion of wealth in farm and non-farm welfare comparisons. Proposals aimed at directly increasing incomes are discussed and hypothetical income distributions are presented to indicate the impact of the Henderson Inquiry's guaranteed income scheme on farm income distributions.     

The Varying Impacts of Agricultural Support Programs on U.S. Farm Household Consumption

Farm households are economic agents whose income is derived from farm, off-farm, and government sources. This article uses farm-level data from the Agricultural Resource Management Survey (ARMS) and recent advances in the econometric theory of dynamic pseudo-panels to show that farm households consume various sources of income differently at the margin. Particular attention is given to a specific type of lump-sum government transfer payment intended to be decoupled from (independent of) farm production decisions. The results suggest that relatively decoupled government subsidies have a greater marginal effect on farm household consumption than subsidies that are tied to market conditions.     

Income risk and farm consumption behavior

Using panel data from Illinois grain farmers, a direct test of the relationship between income risk and farm consumption behavior is conducted. The estimation results indicate that income risk significantly affects farm consumption and the results are robust using alternative risk measures. This finding casts doubt on the relevance of the conventional life-cycle permanent income hypothesis, which implies that risk has no effect on consumption.     

Off-farm labor supply responses to permanent and transitory farm income

A sample of Iowa farm couples is used to evaluate whether off‐farm labor supply decisions respond to permanent and transitory components of farm income. Off‐farm labor supply of both spouses declines in response to increases in permanent farm income. Farm wives also reduce off‐farm labor supply in response to positive transitory farm income shocks. Consequently, one mechanism farm households use to smooth their goods consumption when facing fluctuating farm income is to modify their consumption of leisure. Ability to smooth goods consumption does not imply the absence of liquidity constraints among farm households unless leisure consumption is also smoothed.     

Welfare implications of reduced government subsidies to farm families: accounting for fringe benefits

In the past three decades, farm families have relied on government payments and off‐farm income to reduce income risk and increase total household income. Studies have shown that, as the income effect dominates, government payments tend to reduce off‐farm labor of farm operators and spouses. But that may not be true if one accounts for fringe benefits associated with off‐farm employment. Additionally, with looming budget deficits and the possibility of a reduction in decoupled government payments, farm families may be facing an altered economic environment. Our study addresses this issue by examining the links between government farm program payments and the ever‐important role of fringe benefits in the off‐farm employment of farm couples. Results from farm‐level data actually show that the marginal effect of government payments on hours worked off‐farm will decrease in magnitude when accounting for fringe benefits, ceteris paribus. These results support the notion that farm households’ welfare loss stemming from reduced decoupled payments may be overstated when models exclude fringe benefits from the estimation of off‐farm labor supply.     

Mobile money,agricultural marketing,and off‐farm income in Uganda

Mobile money (MM) services can contribute to welfare gains in smallholder farm households. Previous research showed that one important pathway for these MM‐related welfare gains is through higher remittances received from relatives and friends. Here, the role of other impact pathways is examined, especially focusing on agricultural marketing and off‐farm economic activities. The analysis builds on panel data from smallholder coffee farmers in Uganda. Regression models show that the adoption of MM technology has contributed to higher household incomes and consumption levels. Off‐farm income gains are identified to be an important pathway, also beyond remittances. Typical off‐farm income sources are small businesses in trade, transport, and handicrafts, which benefit from novel savings and money transfer opportunities through MM. In terms of agricultural marketing, MM users sell a larger proportion of their coffee as shelled beans to buyers in high‐value markets, instead of selling to local traders immediately after harvest. MM services help to reduce cash constraints and facilitate transactions with buyers from outside local regions. In conclusion, MM can contribute to rural development through various important pathways. Analysis of adoption patterns suggests that MM services are socially inclusive.     

Agricultural Commercialisation and Nutrition in Smallholder Farm Households

Commercialisation of smallholder agriculture is important for rural economic growth. While previous studies have analysed effects of commercialisation on productivity and income, implications for farm household nutrition have received much less attention. We evaluate the effects of commercialisation on household food security and dietary quality with a special focus on calorie and micronutrient consumption. We also examine transmission channels by looking at the role of income, gender, and possible substitution effects between the consumption of own-produced and purchased foods. The analysis uses survey data from farm households in Kenya and a control function approach. Generalised propensity scores are employed to estimate continuous treatment effects. Commercialisation significantly improves food security and dietary quality in terms of calorie, zinc and iron consumption. For vitamin A, effects are insignificant. Commercialisation contributes to higher incomes and increased nutrients from purchased foods, but it does not reduce the consumption of nutrients from own-produced foods. Enhancing market access is important not only for rural economic growth, but also for making smallholder agriculture more nutrition-sensitive.     

Public Policy in the 21st Century: Is Prairie Agriculture Becoming Like Any Other Industry? Does it Matter?

The question addressed in this paper is whether Prairie agriculture has become "like any other industry". The implication is that a positive response would lead to the conclusion that it should therefore be treated "like any other industry" rather than being accorded the special status that it has enjoyed for more than a century
We show that, as net farm incomes have declined over the past 35 years, Prairie farmers have responded by seeking other (non-farm) sources of income. At the time of the 1996 census, net farm income accounted for only 31 percent of farm family income (down from 75 percent in 1967). By 1999, the contribution of net farm income was even lower than in 1996
In spite of the dwindling contribution of net farm income to farm family income, average farm family income in Saskatchewan has exceeded average provincial household income for all but two years between 1971 and 1998, Under these circumstances, it is necessary to ask why it is in the public interest to subsidize an activity which, in recent good times, produced 31 percent of the income of a subset of the population whose household incomes were 10–15 percent above the provincial average
Based on income levels, it is probably no longer necessary to accord farm families special status in the public policy arena. However, other policy considerations (immobility of resources, the role of agriculture in the rural economy, environmental considerations, food safety and security, for example) remain, differentiating agriculture from other industries     

CONCEPTS AND MEASUREMENT OF THE INCOMES,WEALTH AND ECONOMIC WELL-BEING OF FARMERS

Concern over the incomes of farmers has been a fundamental but ill-defined component in the agricultural policies of the UK and many other industrialised countries. Attention is drawn to the inability of the UK's annual White Paper aggregate income figure to reveal much of the income position of farm families. Current income from farming is only a partial measure of the potential spending power of farmers: many have off-farm sources of income which must be taken into account when, for example, assessing poverty and these sources appear to be growing in relative importance. In the longer term, capital gains form part of the returns to landowning farmers but are usually ignored. The frequently-found combination of low current incomes and great wealth has prompted the use of a measure of economic status which combines the two. A prime requirement appears to be a more precise statement of the aims of income policy and the use of income measures most appropriate to the circumstances.     

PART TIME FARMING—IMPLICATIONS FOR FARM FAMILY INCOME

The Common Agricultural Policy has been more successful at securing food supplies than at providing adequate incomes for small farmers. Among proposals for resolving the problem, part time farming is a promising option. To date, agricultural policy has at best ignored farms below the ‘full time’ threshold, at worst discriminated against them. The new Agricultural Structures policy embodies a more positive approach, however. Robson's paper calls for better information on farm households with other gainful activities. Statistics from the 1983 Farm Structure Survey provide insight into the nature and extent of part time farming in the European Community. Neglect of part time farming in the UK up to now may have stemmed from its perceived irrelevance for agricultural policy. Now that it is being viewed in a more favourable light, policy makers need to be appraised of the facts. Currently about one third of main agricultural holdings in England and Wales are part time farms in the sense that farmer or spouse combines another paid job with farming. Gasson's paper explores the nature of these other jobs and features of their distribution. Following trends in other developed countries, non-farm activities are becoming increasingly important for UK farming families. Growth in part time farming has obvious implications for income support, widely agreed to be the fundamental objective of agricultural policy in western Europe. Existing farm income measures are not adequate for assessing the extent of the income problem in agriculture. Data from the Inland Revenue's Survey of Personal Incomes and the Wye College part time farming survey fill some of the gaps left in official measurements. Non-farming earnings, pensions and investment income contribute significantly to farm household incomes. A majority of part time farming families in England and Wales make more from other sources than from farming. Although average incomes of part time farmers may exceed those of full timers, Hill's paper identifies a section of part time farming families with inadequate incomes from all sources.     

Determinants of non-farm labour participation rates among farmers in Australia

In recent decades, non-farm employment has become prevalent and an important source of income for Australian farm families. However, models identifying the relative significance of the socioeconomic variables influencing non-farm employment participation rates have never been estimated in Australia. In this paper, a bivariate probit model of non-farm employment participation rates was estimated, using information from the Australian Bureau of Agricultural Resource Economics (ABARE) 1994–1995 surveys. It was found that the participation decision of the farm operator and spouse is likely to be jointly determined, that non-farm employment participation increased at a declining rate with age among farmers and that university education enhances the participation rates particularly among spouses. Participation rates were also higher among spouses with lower other income and with no dependent children.     

Impact of off‐farm income on food expenditures in rural Bangladesh: an unconditional quantile regression approach

This study examines the effects of off‐farm income on food expenditures of rural Bangladeshi households. Our analysis yields unbiased estimates of the unconditional impact of off‐farm income on food expenditures and reveals the heterogeneous effects that occur across the distribution of total food consumption expenditures. The findings suggest that the impacts of off‐farm income are uniformly positive across the unconditional quantile regression and significantly increase food consumption expenditures for all quantiles, except for the 25th quantile. In addition, we found that schooling, experience, and location of the household increase the food expenditures of rural households. Most importantly, this article argues that female‐headed rural households in which the female works off the farm tend to have significantly lower food expenditures.     

Farmer Decision‐Making with Conflicting Goals: A Recursive Strategic Programming Analysis

This paper concerns the analysis of farmers' goal trade‐offs using a series of representative dairying and beef/sheep farm models. The models employ an adaptive feedback structure and expectations model to track adjustment processes over a seven‐year planning horizon, 1991/92 to 1997/98. Model solutions, under a conventional profit maximising objective function, and using a weighted goal programming formulation, under a series of empirically specified alternative goal orientations, are examined and compared. The paper identifies significant variation among farm families in terms of ability to attain key goals concerning farm profitability, family consumption, farm investment, growth and cash flow. The results quantify the trade‐off between family consumption and farm investment/growth goals.     

THE COST OF FOOD MARKETING*

There exists a wealth of statistical data in the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food on agricultural structure and production, and on the consumption of food, much of which is well known and readily available to research workers outside. But much less is known about the manufacturing and distribution costs of food between the farm gate and the consumer. The purpose of this paper is to present aggregate data relating to food marketing, in much the same way that earlier contributions, notably to this Journal, have covered agricultural output and net income, and farm structure. Changes in the food marketing sector since the end of rationing are briefly set out and, following discussion of some of the conceptual problems involved, estimates are presented of the value added to food between farm or port and the retail level, and of the magnitude of the flows within the sector     

Nonpecuniary Benefits to Farming: Implications for Supply Response to Decoupled Payments

We develop a household model wherein farmers allocate labor to maximize utility from leisure, consumption, and nonpecuniary benefits from farming. The model shows that farmers with decreasing marginal utility of income respond to higher decoupled payments by decreasing off-farm labor and increasing farm labor, resulting in greater agricultural output. We then estimate the difference between farm and off-farm returns to labor using data from three nationally representative farm household surveys. The finding of a large on-farm/off-farm wage differential provides compelling evidence of substantial nonpecuniary benefits from farming.     

INCOME TAX DATA AND FARM FINANCIAL STATISTICS

Tracing the income patterns of individual farm operators whose major source of income is generally derived from farming indicates that off-farm income is becoming an increasingly important income component. The relative importance of off-farm income has nearly quadrupled during the last 20 years, rising from about 10 percent of total income to about 37 percent of total income. Most of this off-farm income can be traced to wages and salaries. These fractions are heavily dependent upon relative income levels. In 1970, very low income farmers posted an aggregate net farm loss whereas the $15,000 - $20,000 class secured about three-quarters of their total income from farm sources. In this same year, wages and salaries were generally the prime off-farm income source for farmers with an assessed income of less than $20,000. Dividends and interest were more important to farmers with an income in excess of $20,000. These differences are faithfully reflected in the regional compilations. As a percent of total income, off-farm income ranged from 41 percent in Ontario to about 29 percent in Quebec. The composition of off-farm sources also varies considerably between regions. In 1970 the income position of taxable unincorporated farm operators (who relied on the farm for their major source of income) remained relatively unfavorable. These farmers still had one of the lowest average incomes of any major occupational class in Canada, with an income distribution which was relatively equally distributed between income classes and not unlike that of the national average. These assessed income statistics, of course, are not necessarily indicative of the welfare position of the respective occupational classes. The calculations conducted are simply illustrative of how income tax statistics can be utilized to facilitate our understanding of the income structure in primary agriculture today. The exercise simply underlines the observation that: The fact that there are conceptual differences between income tax data and other data sources should not detract from the usefulness of the income tax data …. Income tax statistics can stand as an independent data source for the analysis of a variety of issues [13]. For many purposes the tax definition of a farm operator may be more operational than the concept of a farmer as defined in the Census of Agriculture. We might profit considerably from further analyses which attempt to disaggregate Census farms into more homogeneous farm-types using the tax statistics available.     

THE VALUE OF FARM ANIMAL WELFARE

This paper explores further some of the ideas put forward by McInerney (1993) in his economic perspective of animal welfare. It uses a simple economic framework to consider citizens' concerns and perceptions about farm animal welfare and the production and consumption of livestock products in society. People's perceptions that certain aspects of livestock production give rise to poor farm animal welfare are a potential source of disutility for them. This disutility may be associated with people's own consumption of livestock products and/or with other people's consumption. The latter is a negative externality of consumption in society, resulting in very real indirect costs associated with livestock production. The paper discusses the need for valuing farm animal welfare, considers techniques for evaluation and highlights some of the policy issues involved.     

Income Diversification of Rural Households in China

This article examines how different patterns of farm‐level diversification affect the income levels of rural households in China. Using quantile regression analysis of data from a rural household survey, the empirical results exhibit significant differences in diversification effects across rural income strata and various structural characteristics. Diversification, especially involving nonfarm employment and migration, brings a monetary premium to low‐income rural families and an income discount to high‐income families. The policy implications suggest the encouragement of labor‐intensive enterprises in rural areas and improvement of labor quality through rural education and training programs.