Contract farming, contract design and smallholder livelihoods

Contract farming has gained in importance in many developing countries. Previous studies analysed effects of contracts on smallholder farmers’ welfare, yet mostly without considering that different types of contractual relationships exist. Here, we examine associations between contract farming and f...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Ruml, Anette, Ragasa, Catherine, Qaim, Matin
Format: Journal Article
Language:Inglés
Published: Wiley 2022
Subjects:
Online Access:https://hdl.handle.net/10568/141171
_version_ 1855522084803837952
author Ruml, Anette
Ragasa, Catherine
Qaim, Matin
author_browse Qaim, Matin
Ragasa, Catherine
Ruml, Anette
author_facet Ruml, Anette
Ragasa, Catherine
Qaim, Matin
author_sort Ruml, Anette
collection Repository of Agricultural Research Outputs (CGSpace)
description Contract farming has gained in importance in many developing countries. Previous studies analysed effects of contracts on smallholder farmers’ welfare, yet mostly without considering that different types of contractual relationships exist. Here, we examine associations between contract farming and farm household income in the oil palm sector of Ghana, explicitly differentiating between two types of contracts, namely simple marketing contracts and more comprehensive resource-providing contracts. Moreover, we look at different income sources to better understand how both contracts are linked to farmers’ livelihood strategies. We use cross-sectional survey data and regression models. Issues of endogeneity are addressed through measuring farmers' willingness-to-participate in contracts and using this indicator as an additional covariate. Farmers with both types of contracts have significantly higher household incomes than farmers without a contract, yet with notable differences in terms of the income sources. Farmers with a marketing contract allocate more household labour to off-farm activities and thus have higher off-farm income. In contrast, farmers with a resource-providing contract have larger oil palm plantations and thus higher farm incomes. The findings suggest that the two contract types are associated with different livelihood strategies and that disaggregated analysis of different income sources is important to better understand possible underlying mechanisms.
format Journal Article
id CGSpace141171
institution CGIAR Consortium
language Inglés
publishDate 2022
publishDateRange 2022
publishDateSort 2022
publisher Wiley
publisherStr Wiley
record_format dspace
spelling CGSpace1411712025-10-26T13:01:28Z Contract farming, contract design and smallholder livelihoods Ruml, Anette Ragasa, Catherine Qaim, Matin elaeis guineensis oil palms nonfarm income household income smallholders livelihoods contract farming credit Contract farming has gained in importance in many developing countries. Previous studies analysed effects of contracts on smallholder farmers’ welfare, yet mostly without considering that different types of contractual relationships exist. Here, we examine associations between contract farming and farm household income in the oil palm sector of Ghana, explicitly differentiating between two types of contracts, namely simple marketing contracts and more comprehensive resource-providing contracts. Moreover, we look at different income sources to better understand how both contracts are linked to farmers’ livelihood strategies. We use cross-sectional survey data and regression models. Issues of endogeneity are addressed through measuring farmers' willingness-to-participate in contracts and using this indicator as an additional covariate. Farmers with both types of contracts have significantly higher household incomes than farmers without a contract, yet with notable differences in terms of the income sources. Farmers with a marketing contract allocate more household labour to off-farm activities and thus have higher off-farm income. In contrast, farmers with a resource-providing contract have larger oil palm plantations and thus higher farm incomes. The findings suggest that the two contract types are associated with different livelihood strategies and that disaggregated analysis of different income sources is important to better understand possible underlying mechanisms. 2022-01 2024-04-12T13:37:24Z 2024-04-12T13:37:24Z Journal Article https://hdl.handle.net/10568/141171 en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2017.09.008 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2017.11.001 Open Access Wiley Ruml, Anette; Ragasa, Catherine; and Qaim, Matin. 2022. Contract farming, contract design and smallholder livelihoods. Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 66(1): 24-43. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8489.12462
spellingShingle elaeis guineensis
oil palms
nonfarm income
household income
smallholders
livelihoods
contract farming
credit
Ruml, Anette
Ragasa, Catherine
Qaim, Matin
Contract farming, contract design and smallholder livelihoods
title Contract farming, contract design and smallholder livelihoods
title_full Contract farming, contract design and smallholder livelihoods
title_fullStr Contract farming, contract design and smallholder livelihoods
title_full_unstemmed Contract farming, contract design and smallholder livelihoods
title_short Contract farming, contract design and smallholder livelihoods
title_sort contract farming contract design and smallholder livelihoods
topic elaeis guineensis
oil palms
nonfarm income
household income
smallholders
livelihoods
contract farming
credit
url https://hdl.handle.net/10568/141171
work_keys_str_mv AT rumlanette contractfarmingcontractdesignandsmallholderlivelihoods
AT ragasacatherine contractfarmingcontractdesignandsmallholderlivelihoods
AT qaimmatin contractfarmingcontractdesignandsmallholderlivelihoods