can (SSA) agriculture. Each adds to our understanding of processes of change in SSA agricultural production, cost, and productivity, although major gaps in that understanding remain. While each paper relies on different data and methods, taken together they stand in some contrast to most studies of SSA agriculture over the last decade in that they each offer more positive readings of change in SSA agriculture than have most previous studies. I will discuss each study briefly, beginning with the micro-data study (Savadogo, Reardon, and Pietola for Burkina Faso), then the macrodata study of Zimbabwe (Jayne, et al.), and finally Black's multi-country data study (hereafter referred to as the Burkina, Zimbabwe, and SSA studies). The Burkina Faso paper is a first effort at analyzing a rich data set collected with considerably more care than is the norm for SSA agricultural studies. The data set in question includes crop-specific inputs (land, labor, fertilizer and manure, and, presumably, animal labor) and enables estimation of crop-specific production functions. The authors specify a quadratic production function (1) and input demand functions (2). It is not clear what is gained by the use of the complex quadratic production function, since factor demand functions consistent with it are not estimated. (The quadratic production function is not a self-dual function, although the normalized quadratic profit function is widely used as in the Zimbabwe paper.) Savadogo, Reardon, and Pietola could have treated their production functions as having an animal traction input and, in a pooled sample, attempted to deal with the problem of corner solutions, in that roughly half the farmers do not actually use animal traction. The Mills ratio from (3) would have been appropriate. Instead they chose to split the sample, creating a selectivity bias. This problem is recognized and the Mills ratio procedure is probably also appropriate for it. However, in the animal traction sample, the animal traction input is a left-out variable and this creates a bias in the estimates.
Read full abstract