IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea00/21788.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Supervision And Transaction Costs: Evidence From Rice Farms In Bicol, The Philippines

Author

Listed:
  • Evenson, Robert E.
  • Kimhi, Ayal
  • Desilva, Sanjaya

Abstract

Labor markets in all economies are subject to transaction costs associated with recruiting, monitoring and supervising workers. The level of transaction costs affects labor and land contract choices and family labor advantages. Rural labor markets in developing economies, where institutions such as labor and contract law and formal employment assistance mechanisms are not in place, are regarded to be particularly sensitive to transaction cost conditions. A number of studies of contract choice support this contention. The inherent difficulty of measuring transaction costs, however, has limited studies on this topic. In this paper, we analyze supervision activities reported in a cross-section survey of rice farmers in the Bicol region of the Philippines. This survey is unique because it provides supervision data at the farm task level in addition to information on production activities and household characteristics over a range of institutional conditions. It also provides barangay (village) level variables that help us to quantify institutional conditions. The data show that family workers either work or supervise, but do not do both at the same time. This is consistent with a simple optimization model in which supervision intensity increases the productivity of hired workers, which is assumed to be lower than that of family members due to the transaction costs. The model predicts that supervision intensity will increase with transaction costs. We use different institutional conditions to proxy for transaction costs, and estimate the demand for supervision time for four different classes of rice production tasks. The estimation strategy controls for selectivity due to two sources: not all farms use hired labor, and not all farms that use hired labor actually supervise. The results indeed show a positive effect of transaction costs on supervision intensity. We then extend the analysis to a farm efficiency specification to test the proposition that supervision activities improve farm efficiency. This framework allows us to relate institutional conditions to farm efficiency directly and indirectly through their effect on supervision activities. We find that transaction costs have a negative direct effect on farm efficiency, but this is partially offset by increased supervision intensity which enhances efficiency. The results enable us to associate institutional conditions with transaction costs and to draw policy inferences regarding the value of improved institutional conditions.

Suggested Citation

  • Evenson, Robert E. & Kimhi, Ayal & Desilva, Sanjaya, 2000. "Supervision And Transaction Costs: Evidence From Rice Farms In Bicol, The Philippines," 2000 Annual meeting, July 30-August 2, Tampa, FL 21788, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea00:21788
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.21788
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/21788/files/sp00ev01.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.21788?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lanzona, Leonardo & Evenson, Robert E., 1997. "The Effects of Transaction Costs on Labor Market Participation and Earnings: Evidence from Rural Philippines Markets," Center Discussion Papers 28465, Yale University, Economic Growth Center.
    2. Van de Ven, Wynand P. M. M. & Van Praag, Bernard M. S., 1981. "The demand for deductibles in private health insurance : A probit model with sample selection," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 229-252, November.
    3. Fare,Rolf & Grosskopf,Shawna & Lovell,C. A. Knox, 2008. "Production Frontiers," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521072069, September.
    4. Sadoulet, Elisabeth & de Janvry, Alain & Benjamin, Catherine, 1996. "Household Behavior With Imperfect Labor Markets," CUDARE Working Papers 25044, University of California, Berkeley, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    5. Jones, Andrew M, 1992. "A Note on Computation of the Double-Hurdle Model with Dependence with an Application to Tobacco Expenditure," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(1), pages 67-74, January.
    6. Frisvold, George B., 1994. "Does supervision matter? Some hypothesis tests using Indian farm-level data," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 217-238, April.
    7. Pitt, Mark M. & Lee, Lung-Fei, 1981. "The measurement and sources of technical inefficiency in the Indonesian weaving industry," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 43-64, August.
    8. Lee, Lung-Fei, 1983. "Generalized Econometric Models with Selectivity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 51(2), pages 507-512, March.
    9. Kimhi, Ayal, 1999. "Double-Hurdle and Purchase-Infrequency Demand Analysis: A Feasible Integrated Approach," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 26(4), pages 425-442, December.
    10. Bulow, Jeremy I & Summers, Lawrence H, 1986. "A Theory of Dual Labor Markets with Application to Industrial Policy,Discrimination, and Keynesian Unemployment," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 4(3), pages 376-414, July.
    11. Reifschneider, David & Stevenson, Rodney, 1991. "Systematic Departures from the Frontier: A Framework for the Analysis of Firm Inefficiency," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 32(3), pages 715-723, August.
    12. Kumbhakar, Subal C & Ghosh, Soumendra & McGuckin, J Thomas, 1991. "A Generalized Production Frontier Approach for Estimating Determinants of Inefficiency in U.S. Dairy Farms," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 9(3), pages 279-286, July.
    13. Bradley T. Ewing & James E. Payne, 1999. "The Trade-Off Between Supervision and Wages: Evidence of Efficiency Wages from the NLSY," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 66(2), pages 424-432, October.
    14. Garcia, Jaume & Labeaga, Jose M, 1996. "Alternative Approaches to Modelling Zero Expenditure: An Application to Spanish Demand for Tobacco," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 58(3), pages 489-506, August.
    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. K. Kalirajan, 1981. "An Econometric Analysis of Yield Variability in Paddy Production," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 29(3), pages 283-294, November.
    17. Erica L. Groshen & Alan B. Krueger, 1990. "The Structure of Supervision and Pay in Hospitals," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 43(3), pages 134-1-146-, April.
    18. Battese, G E & Coelli, T J, 1995. "A Model for Technical Inefficiency Effects in a Stochastic Frontier Production Function for Panel Data," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 325-332.
    19. Neal, Derek, 1993. "Supervision and Wages across Industries," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 75(3), pages 409-417, August.
    20. Meeusen, Wim & van den Broeck, Julien, 1977. "Efficiency Estimation from Cobb-Douglas Production Functions with Composed Error," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 18(2), pages 435-444, June.
    21. Aigner, Dennis & Lovell, C. A. Knox & Schmidt, Peter, 1977. "Formulation and estimation of stochastic frontier production function models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 6(1), pages 21-37, July.
    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. Fertő, Imre, 2002. "A mezőgazdasági termelés szerkezetének változásai a fejlett országokban, I. Miért a családi gazdaság a meghatározó üzemforma a fejlett országok mezőgazdaságában? [Changes in the structure of agricu," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(7), pages 574-596.
    2. Ferto, Imre & Fogarasi, Jozsef, 2005. "The Choice of Farm Organisation. A Hungarian Case," 94th Seminar, April 9-10, 2005, Ashford, UK 24420, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    3. Cuevas, Agham C., 2014. "Transaction Costs of Exchange in Agriculture: A Survey," Asian Journal of Agriculture and Development, Southeast Asian Regional Center for Graduate Study and Research in Agriculture (SEARCA), vol. 11(1), pages 1-18, June.
    4. Desilva, Sanjaya, 2000. "Skills, Partnership and Tenancy in Sri Lanka Rice Farms," Center Discussion Papers 28401, Yale University, Economic Growth Center.
    5. James Roumasset, 2006. "The Economics of Agricultural Development: What Have We Learned? Processes," Working Papers 200604, University of Hawaii at Manoa, Department of Economics.
    6. Jamal, Erizal & Dewi, Yovita Anggita, 2009. "Technical Efficiency of Land Tenure Contracts in West Java Province, Indonesia," Asian Journal of Agriculture and Development, Southeast Asian Regional Center for Graduate Study and Research in Agriculture (SEARCA), vol. 6(2), pages 1-13, December.
    7. Mamiit, Rusyan Jill & Yanagida, John & Villanueva, Donald, 2020. "Farm locations and dwelling clusters: Do they make production and technical efficiency spatially contagious?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    8. repec:sag:seajad:v:6:y:2009:i:2:p:21-34 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Sanjaya DeSilva, 2011. "Access to Markets and Farm Efficiency: A Study of Rice Farms in the Bicol Region, Philippines," Economics Working Paper Archive wp_687, Levy Economics Institute.
    10. Ibrahim Demir, 2016. "The firm size, farm size, and transaction costs: the case of hazelnut farms in Turkey," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 47(1), pages 81-90, January.

    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. Robert E. Evenson & Ayal Kimhi & Sanjaya DeSilva, 2000. "Supervision and Transaction Costs: Evidence from Rice Farms in Bicol, the Philippines," Working Papers 814, Economic Growth Center, Yale University.
    2. Tim J. Coelli, 1995. "Recent Developments In Frontier Modelling And Efficiency Measurement," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 39(3), pages 219-245, December.
    3. Federica VIGANO & Andrea SALUSTRI, 2015. "Matching profit and Non-profit Needs: How NPOs and Cooperative Contribute to Growth in Time of Crisis. A Quantitative Approach," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 86(1), pages 157-178, March.
    4. Gian Carlo Scarsi, 1999. "Local Electricity Distribution in Italy: Comparative Efficiency Analysis and Methodological Cross-Checking," Working Papers 1999.16, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    5. Desilva, Sanjaya, 2000. "Skills, Partnership and Tenancy in Sri Lanka Rice Farms," Center Discussion Papers 28401, Yale University, Economic Growth Center.
    6. Carlo Altomonte & Marcella Nicolini & Armando Rungi & Laura Ogliari, 2010. "Assessing the Competitive Behaviour of Firms in the Single Market: A Micro-based Approach," European Economy - Economic Papers 2008 - 2015 409, Directorate General Economic and Financial Affairs (DG ECFIN), European Commission.
    7. Sanjaya DeSilva, 2000. "Skills, Partnerships and Tenancy in Sri Lankan Rice Farms," Working Papers 819, Economic Growth Center, Yale University.
    8. Kalb, Alexander, 2008. "The Impact of Intergovernmental Grants on Cost Efficiency: Theory and Evidence from German Municipalities," ZEW Discussion Papers 08-051, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    9. Kashiwagi, Kenichi & Mtimet, Nadhem & Zaibet, Lokman & Nagaki, Masakazu, 2010. "Technical efficiency of olive oil manufacturing and efficacy of modernization programme in Tunisia," 2010 AAAE Third Conference/AEASA 48th Conference, September 19-23, 2010, Cape Town, South Africa 96195, African Association of Agricultural Economists (AAAE).
    10. Fenn, Paul & Vencappa, Dev & Diacon, Stephen & Klumpes, Paul & O'Brien, Chris, 2008. "Market structure and the efficiency of European insurance companies: A stochastic frontier analysis," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 86-100, January.
    11. Alwin Keil & Alwin D’souza & Andrew McDonald, 2015. "Zero-tillage as a pathway for sustainable wheat intensification in the Eastern Indo-Gangetic Plains: does it work in farmers’ fields?," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 7(5), pages 983-1001, October.
    12. Dhehibi, Boubaker & Lachaal, Lassaad & Elloumi, Mohamed & Messaoud, Emna B., 2007. "Measurement and Sources of Technical Inefficiency in the Tunisian Citrus Growing Sector," 103rd Seminar, April 23-25, 2007, Barcelona, Spain 9391, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    13. Noel Uri, 2003. "The Effect of Incentive Regulation in Telecommunications in the United States," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 37(2), pages 169-191, May.
    14. Simar, Leopold & Wilson, Paul W., 2007. "Estimation and inference in two-stage, semi-parametric models of production processes," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 136(1), pages 31-64, January.
    15. Madau, Fabio A., 2005. "Technical Efficiency in Organic Farming: An Application on Italian Cereal Farms Using a Parametric Approach," 2005 International Congress, August 23-27, 2005, Copenhagen, Denmark 24545, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    16. Paul, Satya & Shankar, Sriram, 2018. "Modelling Efficiency Effects in a True Fixed Effects Stochastic Frontier," MPRA Paper 87437, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Young Hoon Lee, 2009. "Frontier Models and their Application to the Sports Industry," Working Papers 0903, Nam Duck-Woo Economic Research Institute, Sogang University (Former Research Institute for Market Economy), revised 2009.
    18. Uri, Noel D., 2001. "The effect of incentive regulation on productive efficiency in telecommunications," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 23(8), pages 825-846, November.
    19. Madau, Fabio A., 2011. "Parametric Estimation of Technical and Scale Efficiencies in Italian Citrus Farming," Agricultural Economics Review, Greek Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 12(1).
    20. Sherlund, Shane M. & Barrett, Christopher B. & Adesina, Akinwumi A., 2002. "Smallholder technical efficiency controlling for environmental production conditions," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 85-101, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Crop Production/Industries;

    JEL classification:

    • O13 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Agriculture; Natural Resources; Environment; Other Primary Products
    • D23 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Organizational Behavior; Transaction Costs; Property Rights
    • J43 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Particular Labor Markets - - - Agricultural Labor Markets
    • Q12 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Micro Analysis of Farm Firms, Farm Households, and Farm Input Markets

    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:ags:aaea00:21788. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.html .

    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.