Agricultural Policies for Poverty Reduction by OECD Publishing PDF

By OECD Publishing

ISBN-10: 9264112901

ISBN-13: 9789264112902

Show description

Read or Download Agricultural Policies for Poverty Reduction PDF

Similar development & growth books

Read e-book online Doctrines of Development PDF

Doctrines of improvement examines the background of the belief of improvement and doctrines governments have hired to perform improvement coverage. starting with the 19th century 'invention' of contemporary improvement, the authors speak about Marx's early critique of improvement and the construction of the proposal of underdevelopment.

Understanding Economic Development: A Global Transition from by Colin White PDF

This attention-grabbing e-book considers some of the most very important difficulties in economics - the inception of recent financial improvement. It distils the conclusions of an enormous literature, drawing from economics, fiscal heritage and enterprise and administration. It additionally explores the suggestions of monetary thought, exhibiting their barriers and highlighting replacement ways.

Entrepreneurs in Red: Structure and Organizational - download pdf or read online

In line with firsthand, in-depth, empirical examine performed via Dr. Rupp in his local Hungary, this booklet is a causal research of the remarkable fiscal luck of personal production corporations, and of the stipulations conducive to administrative aid for such ideologically disrespectable entrepreneurial corporations.

Lesley Sherratt's Can Microfinance Work?: How to Improve Its Ethical Balance PDF

Microfinance begun with the noble objective of assuaging poverty in the course of the extension of small loans to poor---mostly female---borrowers, and has grown to now serve over 200,000,000 debtors. the topic of many hyperbolic claims, it's now more and more said to not have succeeded in both enriching or empowering its debtors.

Extra resources for Agricultural Policies for Poverty Reduction

Sample text

The inevitability of leakages to other agents in the supply chain, and the difficulties of targeting have already been noted. In addition such measures may crowd out the development of private input markets, may lead to the over-use of inputs, and once introduced have historically proven difficult to rescind. Nevertheless, there has been renewed optimism that a new generation of so-called "smart" subsidies, by virtue of innovative design features, such as exit strategies, can deliver income benefits while limiting their known shortcomings (Dorward, 2009b).

In the case of OECD countries, the Policy Evaluation Model (PEM) has shown such instruments to be inefficient, because a large share of the benefits leaks to non-farm factor owners (principally landlords) and suppliers of purchased inputs (OECD, 2001). Moreover, the use of such instruments typically has perverse distributional effects, with larger farmers benefiting more than small ones (OECD, 2003). For developing countries, the effectiveness of such instruments relative to direct payments is currently being investigated with a new model, the Development Policy Evaluation Model (DEVPEM), which adapts the PEM to take account of some specific aspects of developing country agriculture (OECD, 2011a).

Improving the competitiveness of farrn households Income diversification for farm households and salaried agricultural workers Income diversification is essential for many farm households. For the poorest farm households, this is likely to provide some insurance and is in effect a "coping" strategy. For other farm households, having one or more family members draw income from outside agriculture may be the start of a successful move into more remunerative activities. Policies that support farm income alone, such as market price support, act as a disincentive for income diversification outside agriculture, and create an obstacle to one of the key "adjustment pathways".

Download PDF sample

Agricultural Policies for Poverty Reduction by OECD Publishing


by Daniel
4.5

Rated 4.68 of 5 – based on 42 votes