撒哈拉以南非洲农村的政策干预与生产性就业:一项性别差异的荟萃分析

IF 2.4 Q2 AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY
A. Singbo, J. Lokossou
{"title":"撒哈拉以南非洲农村的政策干预与生产性就业:一项性别差异的荟萃分析","authors":"A. Singbo, J. Lokossou","doi":"10.1108/jadee-02-2022-0028","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeThe farm sector is crucial for rural poverty alleviation, alongside the non-farm sector, which contributes to mitigating risks associated with crop failures. This paper investigates the effects of public policies on productive employment within both the farm and non-farm sectors in sub-Saharan Africa.Design/methodology/approachA meta-analysis is conducted exclusively on the results of the Partnership for Economic Policy (PEP)-funded studies under the Policy Analysis on Growth and Employment (PAGE II) initiative. Selected studies focused on the impact of public policies on productive employment in rural farm and non-farm sectors, encompassing a total of nine sub-Saharan Africa countries in: Benin, Burkina Faso, Cote d'Ivoire, Democratic Republic of Congo, Ghana, Lesotho, Nigeria, Senegal and South Africa.FindingsThe results indicate that public investments in rural areas and public policies that facilitate access to productive resources are likely to enhance productive employment. The overall effect size is positive and significant, ranging from 2% to 10% increases in productive employment. Sources of variation include the sector of activity and the policy instrument. In addition, the policy effects are gender-sensitive and seem more consistent in the non-farm sector.Research limitations/implicationsAlthough the selected working papers addressed several aspects of productive employment, other aspects warrant further investigation. Policies involving restrictions or regulations have received little attention in the impact analysis. Researches to fill this gap would be important. Another suggestion for further research is the analysis of the relative importance of non-farm employment in rural areas in developing countries. It is always assumed that rural households depend heavily on agriculture for their subsistence.Originality/valueThe contribution of the paper lies in the comparative analysis of numerous public policies implemented in nine distinct countries. By consolidating data from fourteen 14 different experiences into a single study, the paper offers valuable insights on factors that determine policy effectiveness and contribute to understanding what worked for whom and why.","PeriodicalId":45976,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agribusiness in Developing and Emerging Economies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Policy interventions and productive employment in rural sub-Saharan Africa: a gender-differentiated meta-analysis\",\"authors\":\"A. Singbo, J. Lokossou\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/jadee-02-2022-0028\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"PurposeThe farm sector is crucial for rural poverty alleviation, alongside the non-farm sector, which contributes to mitigating risks associated with crop failures. This paper investigates the effects of public policies on productive employment within both the farm and non-farm sectors in sub-Saharan Africa.Design/methodology/approachA meta-analysis is conducted exclusively on the results of the Partnership for Economic Policy (PEP)-funded studies under the Policy Analysis on Growth and Employment (PAGE II) initiative. Selected studies focused on the impact of public policies on productive employment in rural farm and non-farm sectors, encompassing a total of nine sub-Saharan Africa countries in: Benin, Burkina Faso, Cote d'Ivoire, Democratic Republic of Congo, Ghana, Lesotho, Nigeria, Senegal and South Africa.FindingsThe results indicate that public investments in rural areas and public policies that facilitate access to productive resources are likely to enhance productive employment. The overall effect size is positive and significant, ranging from 2% to 10% increases in productive employment. Sources of variation include the sector of activity and the policy instrument. In addition, the policy effects are gender-sensitive and seem more consistent in the non-farm sector.Research limitations/implicationsAlthough the selected working papers addressed several aspects of productive employment, other aspects warrant further investigation. Policies involving restrictions or regulations have received little attention in the impact analysis. Researches to fill this gap would be important. Another suggestion for further research is the analysis of the relative importance of non-farm employment in rural areas in developing countries. It is always assumed that rural households depend heavily on agriculture for their subsistence.Originality/valueThe contribution of the paper lies in the comparative analysis of numerous public policies implemented in nine distinct countries. By consolidating data from fourteen 14 different experiences into a single study, the paper offers valuable insights on factors that determine policy effectiveness and contribute to understanding what worked for whom and why.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45976,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Agribusiness in Developing and Emerging Economies\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Agribusiness in Developing and Emerging Economies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/jadee-02-2022-0028\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Agribusiness in Developing and Emerging Economies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jadee-02-2022-0028","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的农业部门与非农业部门一样,对减轻农村贫困至关重要,非农业部门有助于减轻与作物歉收相关的风险。本文调查了公共政策对撒哈拉以南非洲农业和非农业部门生产性就业的影响。设计/方法/方法一项荟萃分析仅针对经济政策伙伴关系(PEP)资助的增长与就业政策分析(PAGE II)倡议下的研究结果进行。选定的研究侧重于公共政策对农村农业和非农业部门生产性就业的影响,涵盖撒哈拉以南非洲共9个国家:贝宁、布基纳法索、科特迪瓦、刚果民主共和国、加纳、莱索托、尼日利亚、塞内加尔和南非。研究结果表明,对农村地区的公共投资和促进获得生产资源的公共政策可能会提高生产性就业。总体效应大小是积极和显著的,生产性就业增长2%至10%不等。变化的来源包括活动部门和政策工具。此外,政策效果对性别问题敏感,在非农业部门似乎更为一致。研究局限性/含义尽管选定的工作文件涉及生产性就业的几个方面,但其他方面值得进一步调查。在影响分析中,涉及限制或法规的政策很少受到关注。填补这一空白的研究将是重要的。另一个进一步研究的建议是分析发展中国家农村地区非农就业的相对重要性。人们总是认为农村家庭严重依赖农业维持生计。原创性/价值本文的贡献在于对九个不同国家实施的众多公共政策进行了比较分析。通过将14种不同经历的数据整合到一项研究中,该论文对决定政策有效性的因素提供了有价值的见解,并有助于理解什么对谁有效以及为什么有效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Policy interventions and productive employment in rural sub-Saharan Africa: a gender-differentiated meta-analysis
PurposeThe farm sector is crucial for rural poverty alleviation, alongside the non-farm sector, which contributes to mitigating risks associated with crop failures. This paper investigates the effects of public policies on productive employment within both the farm and non-farm sectors in sub-Saharan Africa.Design/methodology/approachA meta-analysis is conducted exclusively on the results of the Partnership for Economic Policy (PEP)-funded studies under the Policy Analysis on Growth and Employment (PAGE II) initiative. Selected studies focused on the impact of public policies on productive employment in rural farm and non-farm sectors, encompassing a total of nine sub-Saharan Africa countries in: Benin, Burkina Faso, Cote d'Ivoire, Democratic Republic of Congo, Ghana, Lesotho, Nigeria, Senegal and South Africa.FindingsThe results indicate that public investments in rural areas and public policies that facilitate access to productive resources are likely to enhance productive employment. The overall effect size is positive and significant, ranging from 2% to 10% increases in productive employment. Sources of variation include the sector of activity and the policy instrument. In addition, the policy effects are gender-sensitive and seem more consistent in the non-farm sector.Research limitations/implicationsAlthough the selected working papers addressed several aspects of productive employment, other aspects warrant further investigation. Policies involving restrictions or regulations have received little attention in the impact analysis. Researches to fill this gap would be important. Another suggestion for further research is the analysis of the relative importance of non-farm employment in rural areas in developing countries. It is always assumed that rural households depend heavily on agriculture for their subsistence.Originality/valueThe contribution of the paper lies in the comparative analysis of numerous public policies implemented in nine distinct countries. By consolidating data from fourteen 14 different experiences into a single study, the paper offers valuable insights on factors that determine policy effectiveness and contribute to understanding what worked for whom and why.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
37.50%
发文量
58
期刊介绍: The Journal of Agribusiness in Developing and Emerging Economies publishes double-blind peer-reviewed research on issues relevant to agriculture and food value chain in emerging economies in Asia, Africa, Latin America and Eastern Europe. The journal welcomes original research, particularly empirical/applied, quantitative and qualitative work on topics pertaining to policies, processes, and practices in the agribusiness arena in emerging economies to inform researchers, practitioners and policy makers
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信