Abstract
Assertions of pervasive inefficiency in the behavior and organization of developing agriculture are found to be based on unsound methodologies. Models apparently based on expected utility theory are theoretically flawed and use highly restrictive assumptions that make them largely irrelevant for explaining actual decisions. When a more appropriate model is applied to the case of the green revolution in the Philippines, the hypothesis that loss aversion impedes adoption of new technology is rejected. Common assertions about the inefficiency of agricultural institutions are also found wanting. The risk-bearing theory of share-tenancy, which is thought to imply inefficiency, cannot explain observed tenant shares. Once the disadvantages of fixed-lease contracts are recognized, sharing is plausibly second-best efficient. The purported inefficiency implied by the inverse relationship between farm size and yield per hectare also dissipates once the endogeneity of farm size is accounted for.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
