1932
0
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Annual Review of Resource Economics
  4. Volume 14, 2022
  5. Article

Annual Review of Resource Economics

Volume 14, 2022

Structural Transformation of the Agricultural Sector In Low- and Middle-Income Economies

Abstract

Movement of labor from agriculture to nonagriculture and the associated increase in farm size through structural transformation are at the core of economic development. We conduct a comprehensive review of the literature exploring the causes and consequences of the transformation. We discuss () the size and determinants for the persisting wage gap between agriculture and nonagriculture, () policy-induced barriers to structural changes, () the role of trade costs and technical change in shaping the nature of structural transformation and comparative advantage of regions, and () how the overall development of an economy affects the relationship between farm size and farm productivity and hence changes competitiveness of different scales of farms. We also identify questions for policy and research and the ways in which new sources and interoperability of data can help answer these questions.

Keyword(s): developing economies, JEL O11, JEL O12, JEL O20, JEL O47, JEL Q15, productivity, resource allocation, smallholder farming, structural transformation
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-resource-111820-033252
2022-10-05
2024-12-02
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/resource/14/1/annurev-resource-111820-033252.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-resource-111820-033252&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. Abay KA, Abate GT, Barrett CB, Bernard T. 2019. Correlated non-classical measurement errors, ‘second best’ policy inference, and the inverse size-productivity relationship in agriculture. J. Dev. Econ. 139:171–84
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Abay KA, Bevis LM, Barrett CB. 2021. Measurement error mechanisms matter: agricultural intensification with farmer misperceptions and misreporting. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 103:498–522
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Adamopoulos T, Restuccia D. 2014. The size distribution of farms and international productivity differences. Am. Econ. Rev. 104:1667–97
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Adamopoulos T, Restuccia D. 2020. Land reform and productivity: a quantitative analysis with micro data. Am. Econ. J. Macroecon. 12:1–39
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Adamopoulos T, Restuccia D. 2021. Geography and agricultural productivity: cross-country evidence from micro plot-level data NBER Work. Pap. 24532
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Agyei-Holmes A, Buehren N, Goldstein M, Osei RD, Osei-Akoto I, Udry C. 2020. The effects of land title registration on tenure security, investment and the allocation of productive resources Glob. Poverty Res. Lab Work. Pap. 20-107 Buffett Inst. Glob. Stud. Evanston, IL:
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Albert C, Bustos P, Ponticelli J. 2021. The effects of climate change on labor and capital reallocation NBER Work. Pap. 28995
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Albertus M. 2019. The effect of commodity price shocks on public lands distribution: evidence from Colombia. World Dev. 113:294–308
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Albertus M, Diaz-Cayeros A, Magaloni B, Weingast BR. 2016. Authoritarian survival and poverty traps: land reform in Mexico. World Dev. 77:154–70
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Albertus M, Popescu BG. 2020. Does equalizing assets spur development? Evidence from large-scale land reform in Peru. Q. J. Political Sci. 15:255–95
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Ali DA, Deininger K. 2015. Is there a farm size-productivity relationship in African agriculture? Evidence from Rwanda. Land Econ. 91:317–43
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Ali DA, Deininger K. 2021a. Does mechanization reverse the inverse farm size-productivity relationship? Evidence from Ethiopia Policy Res. Work. Pap. World Bank Washington, DC:
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Ali DA, Deininger K. 2021b. Does title increase large farm productivity? Institutional determinants of large land-based investments’ performance in Zambia Work. Pap. World Bank Washington, DC:
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Ali DA, Deininger K, Harris A. 2019a. Does large farm establishment create benefits for neighboring smallholders? Evidence from Ethiopia. Land Econ. 95:71–90
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Ali DA, Deininger K, Ronchi L. 2019b. Costs and benefits of land fragmentation: evidence from Rwanda. World Bank Econ. Rev. 33:750–71
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Alvarez JA. 2020. The agricultural wage gap: evidence from Brazilian micro-data. Am. Econ. J. Macroecon. 12:153–73
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Alvarez-Cuadrado F, Amodio F, Poschke M. 2020. Selection and absolute advantage in farming and entrepreneurship CEPR Discuss. Pap. 14269
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Alvarez-Cuadrado F, Poschke M. 2011. Structural change out of agriculture: labor push versus labor pull. Am. Econ. J. Macroecon. 3:127–58
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Aragon FM, Restuccia D, Rud JP. 2021. Heterogeneity, measurement error, and misallocation in African agriculture: a comment Work. Pap. 697 Dep. Econ. Univ. Toronto: https://www.economics.utoronto.ca/public/workingPapers/tecipa-697.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Arruñada B. 2012. Institutional Foundations of Impersonal Exchange: Theory and Policy of Contractual Registries. Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Arthi V, Beegle K, De Weerdt J, Palacios-Lopez A. 2018. Not your average job: measuring farm labor in Tanzania. J. Dev. Econ. 130:160–72
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Assuncao JJ, Braido LHB. 2007. Testing household-specific explanations for the inverse productivity relationship. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 89:980–90
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Barrett CB. 1996. On price risk and the inverse farm size-productivity relationship. J. Dev. Econ. 51:193–215
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Barrett CB, Bellemare MF, Hou JY. 2010. Reconsidering conventional explanations of the inverse productivity-size relationship. World Dev. 38:88–97
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Beg S. 2022. Digitization and development: property rights security and land and labor markets. J. Eur. Econ. Assoc. 20:395–429
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Bellemare MF, Bloem JR. 2018. Does contract farming improve welfare? A review. World Dev. 112:259–71
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Benjamin D. 1995. Can unobserved land quality explain the inverse productivity relationship?. J. Dev. Econ. 46:51–84
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Benjamin D, Brandt L. 2002. Property rights, labour markets, and efficiency in a transition economy: the case of rural China. Can. J. Econ. 35:689–716
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Bevis LEM, Barrett CB. 2020. Close to the edge: high productivity at plot peripheries and the inverse size-productivity relationship. J. Dev. Econ. 143:102377
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Binswanger HP, Deininger K, Feder G. 1993. Agricultural land relations in the developing world. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 75:1242–48
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Bolhuis M, Rachapalli S, Restuccia D. 2020. Misallocation in Indian agriculture NBER Work Pap. 29363
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Brooks W, Donovan K. 2020. Eliminating uncertainty in market access: the impact of new bridges in rural Nicaragua. Econometrica 88:1965–97
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Bryan G, Chowdhury S, Mobarak AM. 2014. Underinvestment in a profitable technology: the case of seasonal migration in Bangladesh. Econometrica 82:1671–748
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Burke M, Driscoll A, Lobell DB, Ermon S. 2021. Using satellite imagery to understand and promote sustainable development. Science 371:eabe8628
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Bustos P, Caprettini B, Ponticelli J. 2016. Agricultural productivity and structural transformation: evidence from Brazil. Am. Econ. Rev. 106:1320–65
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Bustos P, Garber G, Ponticelli J. 2020. Capital accumulation and structural transformation. Q. J. Econ. 135:1037–94
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Bustos P, Vincenzi JMC, Monras J, Ponticelli J. 2019. Structural transformation, industrial specialization, and endogenous growth NBER Work. Pap. 25871
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Cai S. 2020. Migration under liquidity constraints: evidence from randomized credit access in China. J. Dev. Econ. 142:102247
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Carletto C, Gourlay S, Winters P. 2015. From guesstimates to GPStimates: land area measurement and implications for agricultural analysis. J. Afr. Econ. 24:593–628
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Carletto C, Savastano S, Zezza A. 2013. Fact or artifact: the impact of measurement errors on the farm size-productivity relationship. J. Dev. Econ. 103:254–61
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Castañeda Dower P, Pfutze T 2020. Land titles and violent conflict in rural Mexico. J. Dev. Econ. 144:102431
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Caunedo J, Kala N 2021. Mechanizing agriculture NBER Work. Pap. 29061
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Caunedo J, Keller E. 2021. Capital obsolescence and agricultural productivity. Q. J. Econ. 136:505–61
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Chen C. 2017. Untitled land, occupational choice, and agricultural productivity. Am. Econ. J. Macroecon. 9:91–121
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Chen C. 2020. Technology adoption, capital deepening, and international productivity differences. J. Dev. Econ. 143:102388
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Chen C, Restuccia D, Santaeulalia-Llopis R. 2017. The effects of land markets on resource allocation and agricultural productivity NBER Work. Pap. 24034
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Cheremukhin A, Golosov M, Guriev S, Tsyvinski A. 2015. The economy of People's Republic of China from 1953 NBER Work. Pap. 21397
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Cheremukhin A, Golosov M, Guriev S, Tsyvinski A. 2017. The industrialization and economic development of Russia through the lens of a neoclassical growth model. Rev. Econ. Stud. 84:613–49
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Cohen A. 2019. Estimating farm production parameters with measurement error in land area. Econ. Dev. Cult. Change 68:305–34
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Costinot A, Donaldson D. 2016. How large are the gains from economic integration? Theory and evidence from U.S. agriculture, 1880–1997 NBER Work Pap. 22946
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Costinot A, Donaldson D, Smith C. 2016. Evolving comparative advantage and the impact of climate change in agricultural markets: evidence from 1.7 million fields around the world. J. Political Econ. 124:205–48
     [Google Scholar]
  52. de Brauw A, Mueller V. 2012. Do limitations in land rights transferability influence mobility rates in Ethiopia?. J. Afr. Econ. 21:548–79
     [Google Scholar]
  53. de Janvry A, Emerick K, Gonzalez-Navarro M, Sadoulet E. 2015. Delinking land rights from land use: certification and migration in Mexico. Am. Econ. Rev. 105:3125–49
     [Google Scholar]
  54. de Janvry A, Gonzalez-Navarro M, Sadoulet E. 2014. Are land reforms granting complete property rights politically risky? Electoral outcomes of Mexico's certification program. J. Dev. Econ. 110:216–25
     [Google Scholar]
  55. Deininger K, Byerlee D. 2012. The rise of large farms in land abundant countries: Do they have a future?. World Dev. 40:701–14
     [Google Scholar]
  56. Deininger K, Carletto C, Savastano S, Muwonge J. 2012. Can diaries help in improving agricultural production statistics? Evidence from Uganda. J. Dev. Econ. 98:42–50
     [Google Scholar]
  57. Deininger K, Jin S 2006. Tenure security and land-related investment: evidence from Ethiopia. Eur. Econ. Rev. 50:1245–77
     [Google Scholar]
  58. Deininger K, Jin S 2009. Securing property rights in transition: lessons from implementation of China's rural land contracting law. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 70:22–38
     [Google Scholar]
  59. Deininger K, Jin S, Liu S, Shao T, Xia F 2019. Property rights reform to support China's rural–urban integration: village-level evidence from the Chengdu experiment. Oxf. Bull. Econ. Stat. 81:1214–51
     [Google Scholar]
  60. Deininger K, Jin S, Liu Y, Singh SK 2018a. Can labor-market imperfections explain changes in the inverse farm size–productivity relationship? Longitudinal evidence from rural India. Land Econ. 94:239–58
     [Google Scholar]
  61. Deininger K, Jin S, Xia F, Huang J 2014. Moving off the farm: land institutions to facilitate structural transformation and agricultural productivity growth in China. World Dev. 59:505–20
     [Google Scholar]
  62. Deininger K, Monchuk D, Nagarajan HK, Singh SK. 2017. Does land fragmentation increase the cost of cultivation? Evidence from India. J. Dev. Stud. 53:82–98
     [Google Scholar]
  63. Deininger K, Nizalov D, Singh SK. 2018b. Determinants of productivity and structural change in a large commercial farm environment: evidence from Ukraine. World Bank Econ. Rev. 32:287–306
     [Google Scholar]
  64. Deininger K, Xia F. 2018. Assessing the long-term performance of large-scale land transfers: challenges and opportunities in Malawi's estate sector. World Dev. 104:281–96
     [Google Scholar]
  65. Deolalikar AB. 1981. The inverse relationship between productivity and farm size: a test using regional data from India. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 63:275–79
     [Google Scholar]
  66. Desiere S, Jolliffe D. 2018. Land productivity and plot size: is measurement error driving the inverse relationship?. J. Dev. Econ. 130:84–98
     [Google Scholar]
  67. Dillon A, Gourlay S, McGee K, Oseni G. 2019. Land measurement bias and its empirical implications: evidence from a validation exercise. Econ. Dev. Cult. Change 67:595–624
     [Google Scholar]
  68. Dillon B, Brummund P, Mwabu G. 2019. Asymmetric non-separation and rural labor markets. J. Dev. Econ. 139:78–96
     [Google Scholar]
  69. Dinkelman T, Mariotti M. 2016. The long-run effects of labor migration on human capital formation in communities of origin. Am. Econ. J. Appl. Econ. 8:1–35
     [Google Scholar]
  70. Dippel C, Feir D, Leonard B, Roark M. 2021. Secured transactions laws and economic development on American Indian reservations. AEA Pap. Proc. 111:248–52
     [Google Scholar]
  71. Dippel C, Frye D, Leonard B. 2020. Property rights without transfer rights: a study of Indian land allotment NBER Work Pap. 27479
    [Google Scholar]
  72. Domínguez-Iino T. 2021. Essays in industrial organization and spatial economics PhD Diss. Dep. Econ., New York Univ.
     [Google Scholar]
  73. Eberle UJ, Rohner D, Thoenig M. 2020. Heat and hate: climate security and farmer-herder conflicts in Africa CEPR Discuss Pap. 15542
    [Google Scholar]
  74. Edwards RB. 2019. Spillovers from agricultural processing Work. Pap. Dartmouth Coll. Hanover, NH: https://crawford.anu.edu.au/people/academic/ryan-edwards?tb=publication
    [Google Scholar]
  75. Eggleston K, Sun A, Zhan Z. 2018. The impact of rural pensions in China on labor migration. World Bank Econ. Rev. 32:64–84
     [Google Scholar]
  76. Eswaran M, Kotwal A. 1986. Access to capital and agrarian production organization. Econ. J. 96:482–98
     [Google Scholar]
  77. Faguet J-P, Sánchez F, Villaveces M-J. 2020. The perversion of public land distribution by landed elites: power, inequality and development in Colombia. World Dev. 136:105036
     [Google Scholar]
  78. FAO (Food Agric. Organ.) 2021. Global review of agricultural census methodologies and results (2006–2015): World Programme for the Census of Agriculture 2010 FAO Stat. Dev. Ser. 18 FAO Rome: https://www.fao.org/3/cb2650en/cb2650en.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  79. Farrokhi F, Pellegrina HS. 2021. Trade, technology, and agricultural productivity NBER Work Pap. 27350
    [Google Scholar]
  80. Feder G. 1985. The relation between farm size and farm productivity: the role of family labor, supervision and credit constraints. J. Dev. Econ. 18:297–313
     [Google Scholar]
  81. Fetzer T, Marden S. 2017. Take what you can: property rights, contestability and conflict. Econ. J. 127:757–83
     [Google Scholar]
  82. Foster AD, Rosenzweig MR. 2010. Is there surplus labor in rural India? Cent. Discuss. Pap. 991 Econ. Growth Cent., Yale Univ. New Haven, CT:
     [Google Scholar]
  83. Foster AD, Rosenzweig MR. 2022. Are there too many farms in the world? Labor-market transaction costs, machine capacities and optimal farm size. J. Political Econ. 130: https://doi.org/10.1086/717890
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  84. Frisvold GB. 1994. Does supervision matter? Some hypothesis tests using Indian farm-level data. J. Dev. Econ. 43:217–38
     [Google Scholar]
  85. Gáfaro M, Pellegrina HS. 2022. Trade, farmers’ heterogeneity, and agricultural productivity: evidence from Colombia. J. Int. Econ. 137:103598
     [Google Scholar]
  86. Gai Q, Guo N, Li B, Shi Q, Zhu X. 2021. Migration costs, sorting, and the agricultural productivity gap Work. Pap. Dep. Econ. Univ. Toronto:
     [Google Scholar]
  87. Galan JS. 2020. Tied to the land? Intergenerational mobility and agrarian reform in Colombia Work. Pap. Univ. Andes Bogota:
     [Google Scholar]
  88. Gautam M, Ahmed M 2019. Too small to be beautiful? The farm size and productivity relationship in Bangladesh. Food Policy 84:165–75
     [Google Scholar]
  89. Giles J, Mu R. 2018. Village political economy, land tenure insecurity, and the rural to urban migration decision: evidence from China. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 100:521–44
     [Google Scholar]
  90. Glover S, Jones S. 2019. Can commercial farming promote rural dynamism in Sub-Saharan Africa? Evidence from Mozambique. World Dev. 114:110–21
     [Google Scholar]
  91. Gollin D. 2014. The Lewis Model: a 60-year retrospective. J. Econ. Perspect. 28:71–88
     [Google Scholar]
  92. Gollin D. 2021. Agricultural productivity and structural transformation: evidence and questions for African development CEPR Res. Progr. Struct. Transform. Econ. Growth London:
     [Google Scholar]
  93. Gollin D, Hansen CW, Wingender AM. 2021. Two blades of grass: the impact of the Green Revolution. J. Political Econ. 129:2344–84
     [Google Scholar]
  94. Gollin D, Lagakos D, Waugh ME. 2014. The agricultural productivity gap. Q. J. Econ. 129:939–93
     [Google Scholar]
  95. Gollin D, Rogerson R. 2014. Productivity, transport costs and subsistence agriculture. J. Dev. Econ. 107:38–48
     [Google Scholar]
  96. Gollin D, Udry C. 2020. Heterogeneity, measurement error, and misallocation: evidence from African agriculture. J. Political Econ. 129:1–80
     [Google Scholar]
  97. Gottlieb C, Grobovsek J. 2019. Communal land and agricultural productivity. J. Dev. Econ. 138:135–52
     [Google Scholar]
  98. Gourlay S, Kilic T, Lobell DB. 2019. A new spin on an old debate: errors in farmer-reported production and their implications for inverse scale–productivity relationship in Uganda. J. Dev. Econ. 141:102376
     [Google Scholar]
  99. Hamory J, Kleemans M, Li NY, Miguel E 2021. Reevaluating agricultural productivity gaps with longitudinal microdata. J. Eur. Econ. Assoc. 19:1522–55
     [Google Scholar]
  100. Hao T, Sun R, Tombe T, Zhu X. 2020. The effect of migration policy on growth, structural change, and regional inequality in China. J. Monet. Econ. 113:112–34
     [Google Scholar]
  101. Hayashi F, Prescott EC. 2008. The depressing effect of agricultural institutions on the prewar Japanese economy. J. Political Econ. 116:573–632
     [Google Scholar]
  102. Helfand SM, Taylor MPH. 2021. The inverse relationship between farm size and productivity: refocusing the debate. Food Policy 99:101977
     [Google Scholar]
  103. Herrendorf B, Schoellman T. 2018. Wages, human capital, and barriers to structural transformation. Am. Econ. J. Macroecon. 10:1–23
     [Google Scholar]
  104. Hobijn B, Schoellman T, Vindas A. 2018. Structural transformation by cohort Work. Pap. Ariz. State Univ. Tempe:
     [Google Scholar]
  105. Iscan TB. 2018. Redistributive land reform and structural change in Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 100:732–61
     [Google Scholar]
  106. Jacoby HG. 1993. Shadow wages and peasant family labour supply: an econometric application to the Peruvian Sierra. Rev. Econ. Stud. 60:903–21
     [Google Scholar]
  107. Jayne TS, Muyanga M, Wineman A, Ghebru H, Stevens C, Stickler M. 2019. Are medium-scale farms driving agricultural transformation in Sub-Saharan Africa?. Agric. Econ. 50:75–95
     [Google Scholar]
  108. Julien JC, Bravo-Ureta BE, Rada NE 2019. Assessing farm performance by size in Malawi, Tanzania, and Uganda. Food Policy 84:153–64
     [Google Scholar]
  109. Kagin J, Taylor JE, Yúnez-Naude A. 2016. Inverse productivity or inverse efficiency? Evidence from Mexico. J. Dev. Stud. 52:396–411
     [Google Scholar]
  110. Key N. 2019. Farm size and productivity growth in the United States Corn Belt. Food Policy 84:186–95
     [Google Scholar]
  111. Knippenberg E, Jolliffe D, Hoddinott J. 2020. Land fragmentation and food insecurity in Ethiopia. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 102:1557–77
     [Google Scholar]
  112. LaFave D, Thomas D. 2016. Farms, families, and markets: new evidence on completeness of markets in agricultural settings. Econometrica 84:1917–60
     [Google Scholar]
  113. LaFave DR, Peet ED, Thomas D. 2020. Farm profits, prices and household behavior NBER Work. Pap. 26636
    [Google Scholar]
  114. Lagakos D, Marshall S, Mobarak AM, Vernot C, Waugh ME. 2020. Migration costs and observational returns to migration in the developing world. J. Monet. Econ. 113:138–54
     [Google Scholar]
  115. Leonard B, Parker DP, Anderson TL. 2020. Land quality, land rights, and indigenous poverty. J. Dev. Econ. 143:102435
     [Google Scholar]
  116. Liu Y, Barrett CB, Pham T, Violette W 2020. The intertemporal evolution of agriculture and labor over a rapid structural transformation: lessons from Vietnam. Food Policy 94:101913
     [Google Scholar]
  117. Lobell DB, Azzari G, Burke M, Gourlay S, Jin Z et al. 2020. Eyes in the sky, boots on the ground: assessing satellite- and ground-based approaches to crop yield measurement and analysis. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 102:202–19
     [Google Scholar]
  118. Ma M. 2022. Insecure land tenure, social protection, and resource misallocation: evidence from China's agricultural sector. Econ. Dev. Cult. Change 70: https://doi.org/10.1086/713878
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  119. Ma M, Lin J, Sexton RJ. 2022. The transition from small to large farms in developing economies: a welfare analysis. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 104:111–33
     [Google Scholar]
  120. Maue CC, Burke M, Emerick KJ. 2020. Productivity dispersion and persistence among the world's most numerous firms NBER Work. Pap. 26924
    [Google Scholar]
  121. McArthur JW, McCord GC. 2017. Fertilizing growth: agricultural inputs and their effects in economic development. J. Dev. Econ. 127:133–52
     [Google Scholar]
  122. McGuirk EF, Nunn N. 2020. Nomadic pastoralism, climate change, and conflict in Africa NBER Work. Pap. 28243
    [Google Scholar]
  123. Mendez-Chacon E, van Patten D. 2021. Multinationals, monopsony, and local development: evidence from the United Fruit Company Work. Pap. 46 Fed. Res. Bank Minneapolis MN: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:fip:fedmoi:90267
    [Google Scholar]
  124. Merfeld JD. 2020. Smallholders, market failures, and agricultural production: evidence from India IZA Discuss. Pap. 13682 Inst. Labor Econ. Bonn, Ger: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3691395
    [Google Scholar]
  125. Minale L. 2018. Agricultural productivity shocks, labour reallocation and rural-urban migration in China. J. Econ. Geogr. 18:795–821
     [Google Scholar]
  126. Moscona J. 2019. Agricultural development and structural change within and across countries Work. Pap. MIT Cambridge, MA: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Agricultural-Development-and-Structural-Change%2C-and-Moscona/926378503d77c10b2d51c79728f3a6c529d839b3
    [Google Scholar]
  127. Munshi K, Rosenzweig M. 2016. Networks and misallocation: insurance, migration, and the rural-urban wage gap. Am. Econ. Rev. 106:46–98
     [Google Scholar]
  128. Muyanga M, Jayne TS 2019. Revisiting the farm size-productivity relationship based on a relatively wide range of farm sizes: evidence from Kenya. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 101:1140–63
     [Google Scholar]
  129. Nakamura E, Sigurdsson J, Steinsson J. 2021. The gift of moving: intergenerational consequences of a mobility shock NBER Work. Pap. 22392
    [Google Scholar]
  130. Nath IB. 2020. The food problem and the aggregate productivity consequences of climate change NBER Work Pap. 27297
    [Google Scholar]
  131. Omotilewa OJ, Jayne TS, Muyanga M, Aromolaran AB, Liverpool-Tasie LSO, Awokuse T. 2021. A revisit of farm size and productivity: empirical evidence from a wide range of farm sizes in Nigeria. World Dev. 146:105592
     [Google Scholar]
  132. Pellegrina HS. 2022. Trade, productivity, and the spatial organization of agriculture: evidence from Brazil. J. Dev. Econ. 156:102816
     [Google Scholar]
  133. Porteous O. 2020. Trade and agricultural technology adoption: evidence from Africa. J. Dev. Econ. 144:102440
     [Google Scholar]
  134. Porzio T, Rossi F, Santangelo G. 2020. The human side of structural transformation CEPR Discuss. Pap. 15110. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3674886
    [Google Scholar]
  135. Pulido J, Swiecki T. 2019. Barriers to mobility or sorting? Sources and aggregate implications of income gaps across sectors and locations in Indonesia Work. Pap. Vancouver Sch. Econ. Univ. BC, Can:.
     [Google Scholar]
  136. Rada N, Helfand S, Magalhães M. 2019. Agricultural productivity growth in Brazil: large and small farms excel. Food Policy 84:176–85
     [Google Scholar]
  137. Reardon T, Timmer CP. 2012. The economics of the food system revolution. Annu. Rev. Resour. Econ. 4:225–64
     [Google Scholar]
  138. Restuccia D. 2021. From micro to macro: land institutions, agricultural productivity, and structural transformation Policy Work. Pap. World Bank Washington, DC:
     [Google Scholar]
  139. Restuccia D, Santaeulalia-Llopis R. 2017. Land misallocation and productivity NBER Work Pap. 23128
    [Google Scholar]
  140. Rosenzweig MR, Wolpin KI. 1985. Specific experience, household structure, and intergenerational transfers: farm family land and labor arrangements in developing countries. Q. J. Econ. 100:961–87
     [Google Scholar]
  141. Sheng Y, Chancellor W. 2019. Exploring the relationship between farm size and productivity: evidence from the Australian grains industry. Food Policy 84:196–204
     [Google Scholar]
  142. Sheng Y, Ding J, Huang J. 2019. The relationship between farm size and productivity in agriculture: evidence from maize production in Northern China. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 101:790–806
     [Google Scholar]
  143. Sitko NJ, Jayne TS 2014. Structural transformation or elite land capture? The growth of “emergent” farmers in Zambia. Food Policy 48:194–202
     [Google Scholar]
  144. Sotelo S. 2020. Domestic trade frictions and agriculture. J. Political Econ. 128:2690–738
     [Google Scholar]
  145. Valsecchi M. 2014. Land property rights and international migration: evidence from Mexico. J. Dev. Econ. 110:276–90
     [Google Scholar]
  146. van der Donckt M, Chan P, Silvestrini A 2021. A new global database on agriculture investment and capital stock. Food Policy 100:101961
     [Google Scholar]
  147. Wang X, Yamauchi F, Huang J. 2016a. Rising wages, mechanization, and the substitution between capital and labor: evidence from small scale farm system in China. Agric. Econ. 47:309–17
     [Google Scholar]
  148. Wang X, Yamauchi F, Otsuka K, Huang J. 2016b. Wage growth, landholding, and mechanization in Chinese agriculture. World Dev. 86:30–45
     [Google Scholar]
  149. World Bank 2021. World development indicators Database, World Bank Washington, DC: https://datatopics.worldbank.org/world-development-indicators/
    [Google Scholar]
  150. Young A. 2013. Inequality, the urban-rural gap, and migration. Q. J. Econ. 128:1727–85
     [Google Scholar]
  151. Zhao X. 2020. Land and labor allocation under communal tenure: theory and evidence from China. J. Dev. Econ. 147:102526
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-resource-111820-033252
Loading
Structural Transformation of the Agricultural Sector In Low- and Middle-Income Economies
Annual Review of Resource Economics 14, 221 (2022); https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-resource-111820-033252
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-resource-111820-033252
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-resource-111820-033252
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Supplementary Data

  • Download the Supplemental Appendix (PDF). Includes Supplemental Figures 1-4 and Supplemental Tables 1-2.

  • Article Type: Review Article

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error