农业政策对供给和生产率的影响:来自扭曲差异变化的证据

IF 4.5 3区 经济学 Q1 AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY Agricultural Economics Pub Date : 2022-09-16 DOI:10.1111/agec.12741
Nathan P. Hendricks, Aaron Smith, Nelson B. Villoria, Matthieu Stigler
{"title":"农业政策对供给和生产率的影响:来自扭曲差异变化的证据","authors":"Nathan P. Hendricks,&nbsp;Aaron Smith,&nbsp;Nelson B. Villoria,&nbsp;Matthieu Stigler","doi":"10.1111/agec.12741","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Incentives in agriculture are highly distorted. It has long been argued that these distortions were a key explanation for differences in supply and productivity across countries, but the empirical evidence is limited. We revisit this issue using data on policy distortions across 63 countries for the period 1961–2011. We estimate the effects of differential changes in agricultural distortions across countries on supply and productivity. We highlight concerns in our analysis and previous work about endogeneity that biases the estimated effect downward—countries that lose comparative advantage are likely to increase support for agriculture. We address these concerns by including country and region-time fixed effects, along with a rich set of controls. Overall, we find evidence that enhanced incentives through policy changes can increase the rate of production growth, with about half of the increase due to productivity increases. This result is strongest in Sub-Saharan Africa where anti-agricultural policies on exports were reduced and in Europe where pro-agricultural policies on imports were reduced, driven largely by external pressure. Endogeneity appears to be strongest in Asia where countries have followed the typical pattern of raising support for agriculture during industrialization due to a rising farm-urban income gap.</p>","PeriodicalId":50837,"journal":{"name":"Agricultural Economics","volume":"54 1","pages":"44-61"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The effects of agricultural policy on supply and productivity: Evidence from differential changes in distortions\",\"authors\":\"Nathan P. Hendricks,&nbsp;Aaron Smith,&nbsp;Nelson B. Villoria,&nbsp;Matthieu Stigler\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/agec.12741\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Incentives in agriculture are highly distorted. It has long been argued that these distortions were a key explanation for differences in supply and productivity across countries, but the empirical evidence is limited. We revisit this issue using data on policy distortions across 63 countries for the period 1961–2011. We estimate the effects of differential changes in agricultural distortions across countries on supply and productivity. We highlight concerns in our analysis and previous work about endogeneity that biases the estimated effect downward—countries that lose comparative advantage are likely to increase support for agriculture. We address these concerns by including country and region-time fixed effects, along with a rich set of controls. Overall, we find evidence that enhanced incentives through policy changes can increase the rate of production growth, with about half of the increase due to productivity increases. This result is strongest in Sub-Saharan Africa where anti-agricultural policies on exports were reduced and in Europe where pro-agricultural policies on imports were reduced, driven largely by external pressure. Endogeneity appears to be strongest in Asia where countries have followed the typical pattern of raising support for agriculture during industrialization due to a rising farm-urban income gap.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50837,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Agricultural Economics\",\"volume\":\"54 1\",\"pages\":\"44-61\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Agricultural Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/agec.12741\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Agricultural Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/agec.12741","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

农业的激励机制被严重扭曲。长期以来,人们一直认为,这些扭曲是各国之间供应和生产率差异的关键解释,但经验证据有限。我们利用1961-2011年63个国家的政策扭曲数据重新审视了这一问题。我们估计了各国农业扭曲的差异变化对供给和生产率的影响。在我们的分析和之前的工作中,我们强调了对内生性的关注,内生性会使估计的效果向下倾斜——失去比较优势的国家可能会增加对农业的支持。我们通过包括国家和地区时间固定效应以及一组丰富的控制来解决这些问题。总体而言,我们发现有证据表明,通过政策变化增强的激励可以提高生产增长率,其中约一半的增长是由于生产率的提高。这一结果在撒哈拉以南非洲最为明显,该地区针对出口的反农业政策有所减少,而在欧洲,主要受外部压力的推动,针对进口的亲农业政策有所减少。内生性似乎在亚洲最强,由于城乡收入差距的扩大,亚洲各国遵循了工业化期间增加对农业支持的典型模式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The effects of agricultural policy on supply and productivity: Evidence from differential changes in distortions

Incentives in agriculture are highly distorted. It has long been argued that these distortions were a key explanation for differences in supply and productivity across countries, but the empirical evidence is limited. We revisit this issue using data on policy distortions across 63 countries for the period 1961–2011. We estimate the effects of differential changes in agricultural distortions across countries on supply and productivity. We highlight concerns in our analysis and previous work about endogeneity that biases the estimated effect downward—countries that lose comparative advantage are likely to increase support for agriculture. We address these concerns by including country and region-time fixed effects, along with a rich set of controls. Overall, we find evidence that enhanced incentives through policy changes can increase the rate of production growth, with about half of the increase due to productivity increases. This result is strongest in Sub-Saharan Africa where anti-agricultural policies on exports were reduced and in Europe where pro-agricultural policies on imports were reduced, driven largely by external pressure. Endogeneity appears to be strongest in Asia where countries have followed the typical pattern of raising support for agriculture during industrialization due to a rising farm-urban income gap.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Agricultural Economics
Agricultural Economics 管理科学-农业经济与政策
CiteScore
7.30
自引率
4.90%
发文量
62
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Agricultural Economics aims to disseminate the most important research results and policy analyses in our discipline, from all regions of the world. Topical coverage ranges from consumption and nutrition to land use and the environment, at every scale of analysis from households to markets and the macro-economy. Applicable methodologies include econometric estimation and statistical hypothesis testing, optimization and simulation models, descriptive reviews and policy analyses. We particularly encourage submission of empirical work that can be replicated and tested by others.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Livelihood diversification and household welfare among farm households in the Philippines Growing importance of price: Investigating food values before and during high inflation in Germany An experimental approach to farmer valuation of African rice genetic resources Designated market makers and agricultural futures market quality: Evidence from China's Dalian commodity exchange
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1