Inverse Productivity: Land Quality, Labor Markets, And Measurement Error

By Russell L. Lamb. 2003

214 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: General Agricultural and Biological Sciences, Soil Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/6a86d07e0c179f53e104e06140ef9f6030fc20d1

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In General Agricultural and Biological Sciences

In Soil Science

Citations in the corpus

Close to the edge: High productivity at plot peripheries and the inverse size-productivity relationship (2020, methodology): “If omitted variables drive the inverse relationship, as suggested by Lamb (2003) or Assunção and Braido (2007), we would expect the coefficient estimate on plot size to diminish in absolute value as relevant, observable controls are introduced (Oster, 2016).”
From guesstimates to GPStimates : land area measurement and implications for agricultural analysis (2013, unknown): “The choice of the inverse productivity relationship is motivated by the fact it is a controversial relationship widely discussed in the agricultural development literature and land measurement has been noted as a potential issue in estimating the relationship (Lamb, 2003; Barrett Bellemare and Hou, ”
Land Distribution and International Agricultural Productivity (2007, unknown): “As well as controlling for land quality, Lamb (2003) also suggests that the evidence points to measurement error of farm size as being a source of the IFSP relationship.”
The roles of land tenure reforms and land markets in the context of population growth and land use intensification in Africa (2014, background): “Carletto et al. (forthcoming) used cross-section data from Uganda and took seriously the farm size measurement error problem that Lamb (2003) mentioned as a potential explanation for the IR.”
The political economy of food systems reform (2017, background): “, 2010): although some authors have attributed the finding of such an inverse relationship to errors in land measurement (Lamb, 2003), researchers from the World Bank have more recently concluded that ‘the empirical validity of the [inverse relationship] hypothesis is strengthened, not weakened, by ”
Strategies For Sustainable Land Management And Poverty Reduction In Uganda (2004, unknown): “The literature suggests that the inverse relationship could be due to labor market dualism (Chayanov 1966; Sen 1966), decreasing returns to scale technology (Carter 1984), market failures (Bardhan 1973; Feder 1985; Binswanger and Rosenzweig 1986; Eswaran and Kotwal 1986; Barrett 1996), variations in”
Fact or artefact : the impact of measurement errors on the farm size - productivity relationship (2011, background): “Lastly, attention has been drawn to the possibility that the existence of the IR may be a statistical artifact deriving by measurement error in land data (Lamb, 2003).”
Is There a Farm Size–Productivity Relationship in African Agriculture? Evidence from Rwanda (2014, background): “6 While this may lead to some measurement error (Lamb 2003), measurement by GPS was not an option in light of the small plot sizes which, with standard GPS receivers’ limited precision, could have been measured only with large errors (Carletto et al.”
Revisiting the Farm Size‐Productivity Relationship Based on a Relatively Wide Range of Farm Sizes: Evidence from Kenya (2019, unknown): “Studies examining the relationship between farm size and profits have generally either reversed the IR or weakened it (Carter 1984; Carter and Wiebe 1990; Rosenzweig and Binswanger 1993; Lamb 2003).”
Reconsidering Conventional Explanations of the Inverse Productivity-Size Relationship (2009, background): “Both Sen’s (1966) imperfect labor market explanation and Feder’s (1985) moral hazard explanations, however, are rejected by Assunc ão and Braido (2007), who test them using Indian data.”
Progress in the Modeling of Rural Households’ Behavior under Market Failures (2006, background): “While empirical evidence is far from universal, this relation has been observed in a multiplicity of contexts of traditional agriculture (Berry and Cline, 1979; Carter, 1984; Benjamin, 1995; Barrett, 1996; Lamb, 2003).”
Land productivity and plot size : is measurement error driving the inverse relationship ? (2017, unknown): “Indeed, several studies have shown that the inverse farm-size relationship disappears if labor input is valued at the market wage and have shown that land on small farms is more intensively cultivated than on larger farms (a point noted by many, including: Ali & Deininger, 2015; Benjamin & Brandt, 2”