IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ebl/ecbull/eb-15-00588.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Overcoming farm size induced constraints through endogenous institutional innovations: findings from a field study in Assam plains, India

Author

Listed:
  • Binoy Goswami

    (SOUTH ASIAN UNIVERSITY)

Abstract

The existing studies on the farm size-productivity relationship call for government interventions in some form or another so as to make the farm size induced constraints non-binding. None of these studies explores the potential of the institution of rental markets in helping the farmers in overcoming these constraints. The present study delves into this hitherto unexplored issue. Using survey data, the paper first analyses whether farm size has any impact on productivity and value added and finds none. The insignificance of farm size has been explained in terms of endogenous innovations in the institutions of rental markets.

Suggested Citation

  • Binoy Goswami, 2016. "Overcoming farm size induced constraints through endogenous institutional innovations: findings from a field study in Assam plains, India," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 36(1), pages 411-428.
    • Handle: RePEc:ebl:ecbull:eb-15-00588
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.accessecon.com/Pubs/EB/2016/Volume36/EB-16-V36-I1-P43.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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..
    2. Anand Swamy, 1998. "Factor markets and resource allocation in colonial Punjab," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(3), pages 97-115.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. Justin Yifu Lin, 1995. "Endowments, Technology, and Factor Markets: A Natural Experiment of Induced Institutional Innovation from China's Rural Reform," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 77(2), pages 231-242.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Goswami, B., 2016. "Farm Business Income across Land-size Classes and Land Tenure Status: A Field Study in Assam Plains," Agricultural Economics Research Review, Agricultural Economics Research Association (India), vol. 29(1).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. 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.
    2. Thapa, Sridhar, 2007. "The relationship between farm size and productivity: empirical evidence from the Nepalese mid-hills," 106th Seminar, October 25-27, 2007, Montpellier, France 7940, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    3. 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.
    4. Ali, Daniel Ayalew & Deininger, Klaus, 2014. "Is there a farm-size productivity relationship in African agriculture ? evidence from Rwanda," Policy Research Working Paper Series 6770, The World Bank.
    5. Steven Helfand & Matthew Taylor, 2018. "The Inverse Relationship between Farm Size and Productivity: Refocusing the Debate," Working Papers 201811, University of California at Riverside, Department of Economics.
    6. Deininger, Klaus & Jin, Songqing & Liu, Yanyan & Singh, Sudhir, 2015. "Labor Market Performance and the Farm Size-Productivity Relationship in Rural India," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 212720, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    7. Aragón, Fernando M. & Restuccia, Diego & Rud, Juan Pablo, 2022. "Are small farms really more productive than large farms?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    8. C.S.C. Sekhar, 2021. "Price or income support to farmers? Policy options and implications," IEG Working Papers 420, Institute of Economic Growth.
    9. Phu Nguyen-Van & Nguyen To-The, 2016. "Technical efficiency and agricultural policy: evidence from the teaproduction in Vietnam," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, INRA Department of Economics, vol. 97(3), pages 173-184.
    10. World Bank, 2001. "Mexico : Land Policy--A Decade after the Ejido Reform," World Bank Publications - Reports 15460, The World Bank Group.
    11. Julien, Jacques C. & Bravo-Ureta, Boris E. & Rada, Nicholas E., 2019. "Assessing farm performance by size in Malawi, Tanzania, and Uganda," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 153-164.
    12. Thomas Markussen & Finn Tarp & Do Huy Thiep & Nguyen Do Anh Tuan, 2016. "Inter- and intra-farm land fragmentation in Vietnam," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2016-11, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    13. Desiere, Sam & Jolliffe, Dean, 2018. "Land productivity and plot size: Is measurement error driving the inverse relationship?," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 84-98.
    14. Ekbom, Anders & Sterner, Thomas, 2009. "Soil Properties and Soil Conservation Investments in Agricultural Production - a Case study of Kenya’s Central Highlands," Working Papers in Economics 340, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    15. Kimhi, Ayal, 2003. "Plot Size And Maize Productivity In Zambia: The Inverse Relationship Re-Examined," Discussion Papers 14980, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Department of Agricultural Economics and Management.
    16. Bevis, Leah EM. & Barrett, Christopher B., 2020. "Close to the edge: High productivity at plot peripheries and the inverse size-productivity relationship," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    17. 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.
    18. Klaus Deininger & Songqing Jin & Yanyan Liu & Sudhir K Singh, 2016. "Can Labor Market Imperfections Explain Changes in the Inverse Farm Size–Productivity Relationship? Longitudinal Evidence from Rural India," Working Papers id:10987, eSocialSciences.
    19. Wenjing Han & Zhengfeng Zhang & Xiaoling Zhang & Li He, 2021. "Farmland Rental Participation, Agricultural Productivity, and Household Income: Evidence from Rural China," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-22, August.
    20. Thomas Markussen & Finn Tarp & Do Huy Thiep & Nguyen Do Anh Tuan, 2016. "Inter- and intra-farm land fragmentation in Vietnam," WIDER Working Paper Series 011, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Farm Size; Productivity; Value Added; Innovations; Institutions;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q1 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture

    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:ebl:ecbull:eb-15-00588. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: John P. Conley (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.