The role of agriculture in development remains much debated. This paper takes an empirical perspective and focuses on poverty, as opposed to growth alone. The contribution of a sector to poverty reduction is shown to depend on its own growth performance, its indirect impact on growth in other sectors, the extent to which poor people participate in the sector, and the size of the sector in the overall economy. Bringing together these different effects using cross-country econometric evidence indicates that agriculture is significantly more effective in reducing poverty among the poorest of the poor (as reflected in the $1-day squared poverty gap). It is also up to 3.2 times better at reducing $1-day headcount poverty in low-income and resource rich countries (including those in Sub-Saharan Africa), at least when societies are not fundamentally unequal. However, when it comes to the better off poor (reflected in the $2-day measure), non-agriculture has the edge. These results are driven by the much larger participation of poorer households in growth from agriculture and the lower poverty reducing effect of non-agriculture in the presence of extractive industries.

a b s t r a c tMuch has been written on the determinants of technology adoption in agriculture, with issues such as input availability, knowledge and education, risk preferences, profitability, and credit constraints receiving much attention. This paper focuses on a factor that has been less well documented: the differential ability of households to take on risky production technologies for fear of the welfare consequences if shocks result in poor harvests. Building on an explicit model, this is explored in panel data from Ethiopia. Historical rainfall distributions are used to identify consumption risk. Controlling for unobserved household and time-varying village characteristics, it emerges that not just ex ante credit constraints, but also the possibly low consumption outcomes when harvests fail, discourage the application of fertilizer. The lack of insurance or alternative means of keeping consumption smooth leaves some trapped in low return, lower risk agriculture, one of the mechanisms through which poverty perpetuates itself in agrarian settings.

The Policy Research Working Paper Series disseminates the findings of work in progress to encourage the exchange of ideas about development issues. An objective of the series is to get the findings out quickly, even if the presentations are less than fully polished. The papers carry the names of the authors and should be cited accordingly. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this paper are entirely those of the authors. They do not necessarily represent the views of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/World Bank and its affiliated organizations, or those of the Executive Directors of the World Bank or the governments they represent. Natural Disasters and Growth -Going beyond the Averages *

frica experienced robust economic growth over the past two decades, growing at an average annual rate of 4.5 percent. Did this growth lead to substantial improvements in well-being? Did household income rise and poverty fall? Did other dimensions of well-being, including education, health, physical security, and self-determination, improve? Did all countries and population groups benefit equally, or did progress come at the expense of rising inequality? The answers have been unclear, in part because poverty data on Africa are weak. This report reviews the evidence and provides a unique analysis of the underlying data. It is the first of a two-part volume on poverty in Africa (the second report will explore how to accelerate poverty reduction in the region).

No abstract

Much has been written on the determinants of input and technology adoption in agriculture, with issues such as input availability, knowledge and education, risk preferences, profitability, and credit constraints receiving much attention. This paper focuses on a factor that has been less well documented: the differential ability of households to take on risky production technologies for fear of the welfare consequences if shocks result in poor harvests.Building on an explicit model, this is explored in panel data for Ethiopia. Historical rainfall distributions are used to identify the counterfactual consumption risk. Controlling for unobserved household and time-varying village characteristics, it emerges that not just exante credit constraints, but also the possibly low consumption outcomes when harvests fail, discourage the application of fertiliser. The lack of insurance causes inefficiency in production choices.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.. The University of Chicago Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Economic Development and Cultural Change.

No abstract