Effect of agricultural policy on regional income inequality among farm households

Mishra, Ashok K.; El‐Osta, Hisham S.; Gillespie, Jeffrey M.

doi:10.1016/j.jpolmod.2008.12.007

Cited by 57 publications

(61 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, as evidenced by Raffinetti, Siletti, and vernizzi (2014), this 'normalized Gini' presents abnormal behaviours, such as providing the same inequality measure for two populations having completely different income distributions (total equality and total inequality). Furthermore, it does not allow accurate decomposition by income source (Mishra, El-Osta, & Gillespie, 2009).…”

Section: Negative Incomes and Measures Of Inequalitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Income inequality within smallholder irrigation schemes in Sub-Saharan Africa

Manero

2016

International Journal of Water Resources Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Negative Incomes and Measures Of Inequalitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Income inequality within smallholder irrigation schemes in Sub-Saharan Africa

Manero

2016

International Journal of Water Resources Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The above applies in the case of the ascending arrangement of subjects according to the values of the analyzed variable. Mishra et al (2009) add that in the absence of a negative variable within the analyzed data set, the adjusted Gini coeffi cient achieves the same value as its standard version. In the case of a negative variable, G* ≤ G. Mishra et al (2009) further points out the disadvantages of the adjusted Gini coeffi cient, which are the inability to decompose inequality according to the components of the relevant variable (e.g.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 95%

“…Keeney reached the conclusion that the introduction of direct payments by way of MacSharry's reform contributed to the more balanced income distribution of agricultural households. Authors such as Mishra et al (2009), Moreddu (2011) or Benni and Finger (2012), for example, also reach the conclusion that subsidies contribute to a reduction in the inequality of income of agricultural households. Schmid et al (2006b) analyzes the income of agricultural households included in the FADN accounting data network for the period of [2001][2002][2003].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of distribution impact of subsidies within the Common Agricultural Policy on field production businesses in the Czech Republic

Trnková¹,

Malá²

2013

Acta Univ. Agric. Silvic. Mendelianae Brun.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

TRNKOVÁ, G., MALÁ, Z.: Analysis of distribution impact of subsidies within the Common Agricultural Policy on fi eld production businesses in the Czech Republic. Acta univ. agric. et silvic. Mendel. Brun., 2012, LX, No. 7, pp. 415-424 The article deals with the analysis of inequality in the distribution of the economic result in businesses engaging in fi eld production in the Czech Republic, by way of the assessment of the impact of subsidies on the said inequality and by defi ning the eff ect of the size of the business on the economic result as well as inequality. The methodical tool is the quantifi cation of the Gini coeffi cient and its elasticity. The data basis consists of panel data of 140 agricultural businesses focusing on fi eld production for the period of the years 2005-2010. The main results of the submitted article substantiate a high inequality in the distribution of the economic result for the accounting period among fi eld production businesses. The said inequality is not generally caused by the diff ering size of the analyzed businesses, and the associated volume of subsidies obtained, but is aff ected by other factors, such as the management quality, the investment activity of the business, or exceptional events. Subsidies do contribute to the more equal distribution of the economic result, but their impact is very small. Out of the individual categories of subsidies, the ones with the main redistribution eff ect are direct payments, as a result of the high proportion of total subsidies that they comprise. farm profi t, farm loss, inequality, Gini coeffi cient, subsidy, arable farming, Czech Republic

show abstract

“…input factors such as land enable farmers to produce more output but they also determine the amount of direct payments the farmers receive). However, even if the high-income farmers receive more direct payments than the low-income farmers, the direct farm-level support has still an equalizing effect on the income distribution (see also Keeney 2000;Mishra et al 2009). Hence, the equalizing effect of direct payments can be attributed to the fact that the incomes in the lower tail of the income distribution can be maintained at a certain level.…”

Section: Summary and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The e ffect of different direct payments on changes in household income inequality Line 1990-19951995-20012001-2009Line 1990-19951995-20012001-2009 a RAU = roughage animal unit; b AU = animal unit; ΔG, ΔS, ΔC denote the change in the Gini coefficient of total household income, and the change in the share and concentration of each income component respectively. SE and CE are calculated according to eq.…”

Section: The Effect Of Different Direct Payments On the Household Incmentioning

confidence: 99%

The distributional effects of agricultural policy reforms in Switzerland

Benni¹,

Finger²,

Mann³

et al. 2012

Agric. Econ. - Czech

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Th is paper analyses the eff ects of Swiss agricultural policy reforms and the eff ects of farm income, off -farm income and direct payments on the distribution of the farm household income. To this end, the farm-level income records from the FADN data for the period 1990-2009 are used to calculate Gini coeffi cients and Gini elasticities. Bootstrap sampling procedures are applied to test for signifi cant diff erences of the estimated parameters over time. Th e Gini coeffi cients estimated in our analysis show that the household income inequality in Swiss agriculture only slightly increased from 0.21 to 0.24, but the farm income inequality strongly increased from 0.27 to 0.38 in the considered period. We fi nd furthermore that increasing off -farm incomes and direct payments would decrease the household income inequality. Especially direct payments that support farmers producing under adverse production conditions in the hill and mountain regions have found to be well targeted and thus contribute to the reductions in income inequality in agriculture.

show abstract

Effect of agricultural policy on regional income inequality among farm households

Cited by 57 publications

References 21 publications

Income inequality within smallholder irrigation schemes in Sub-Saharan Africa

Income inequality within smallholder irrigation schemes in Sub-Saharan Africa

Analysis of distribution impact of subsidies within the Common Agricultural Policy on field production businesses in the Czech Republic

The distributional effects of agricultural policy reforms in Switzerland

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About