4.1 Article

Migration, local off-farm employment, and agricultural production efficiency: evidence from China

期刊

JOURNAL OF PRODUCTIVITY ANALYSIS
卷 45, 期 3, 页码 247-259

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11123-015-0464-9

关键词

Migration; Local off-farm; Agriculture; Efficiency; China

资金

  1. CGIAR Research Program on Policies, Institutions and Markets led by IFPRI
  2. National Social Science Fund of China [13CGL085]
  3. Michigan State University's Competitive Discretionary Fund Program [09-CDFP-1965]
  4. Office of the Provost and AgbioResearch
  5. [NSFC71361140370]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper studies the effect of local off-farm employment and migration on the technical efficiency of rural households' crop production using a five-year panel dataset from more than 2000 households in five Chinese provinces. While there is not much debate about the positive contribution of migration and local off-farm employment to China's economy, there is increasing concern about the potential negative effects of moving labor away from agriculture on China's future food security. This is a critical issue as maintaining self-sufficiency in grain production will be critical for China to feed its huge population in the future. Several papers have studied the impact of migration on production and have yielded ambiguous results. But the impact of migration on technical efficiency is rarely studied. Methodologically, we incorporate the correlated random-effects approach into the inefficiency analysis of the standard stochastic production frontier model to control for unobservable factors that are correlated with migration and off-farm employment decisions and technical efficiency. The most consistent result that emerged from our econometric analysis is that neither migration nor local off-farm employment has a negative effect on the technical efficiency of grain production, which does not support the widespread notion that vast-scale labor migration could negatively affect China's future food security.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据