4.4 Article

Understanding the variation in estimates of off-farm labour supply elasticities: A meta-analysis

Journal

JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS
Volume 74, Issue 1, Pages 116-134

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/1477-9552.12494

Keywords

agricultural policy; meta-analysis; off-farm labour supply; rural labour markets; small sample correction; wage elasticity

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The design of rural development policies and government programmes relies on accurate estimates of off-farm labour supply elasticity. However, the wide variation in estimates reduces their predictive power for targeted interventions. A meta-analysis of 137 elasticity estimates from 43 studies identifies the influence of modeling choices on self-selection and life-cycle elements. However, study-specific characteristics do not explain the variation in elasticities.
The design of rural development policies and government programmes in support of farm operations and farm households relies on precise estimates of off-farm labour supply elasticities. However, the wide variation in estimates dilutes their power to predict the magnitude of these targeted interventions. We perform a meta-analysis of estimates of off-farm labour supply elasticity to identify systematic factors that influence these estimates. A sample of 137 elasticities is obtained from 43 studies which use data ranging from 1960 to 2012. We examine theoretical assumptions, data availability and empirical specifications, and other study-specific characteristics. Controlling for potential publication bias, we estimate that the elasticity is approximately 0.64 to 0.77. Results of the analysis show that estimates are affected by modelling choices controlling for self-selection and life-cycle elements. However, we found no compelling evidence that study-specific characteristics of off-farm labour supply functions, including various measurements of labour supply, explain variation in the elasticities.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available