Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Financial Intermediation and Economic Growth 2020
Financial Intermediation and Economic Growth 2020
•Agriculture and employment based strategy requires three basic complementary elements:
•(a) accelerated output growth through technological, institutional and price incentives changes
designed to raise the productivity of small farmers
•( c) diversified nonagricultural, labor intensive rural development activities that directly and
indirectly support and are supported by the community
Barriers to agricultural development
•-the holding down of agricultural prices to favor the industry / urban sector
•-tariff and quote protection for industry, which raises the price of fertilizers,
seeds and equipment
• Changes in rural institutions that control production (banks, moneylenders, seed and fertilizer
distributors),
• Supporting government aid services (e.g. technical and educational extension services,
public credit agencies, storage and marketing facilities, rural transport and feeder roads),
Government pricing policies with regard to both inputs (e.g. removing factor- price distortion)
and output (paying market-value prices to farmers).
• Rural public works projects:
• credit cooperatives: Each farmer must save a small sum and
these sum are pooled, one or two farmers can borrow to buy
capital
• Extension services:
• credit cooperatives: Each farmer must save a small sum and these sum are
pooled, one or two farmers can borrow to buy capital
•The Todaro model assumes that people immigrate in response to urban-rural difference in
expected income rather than actual earnings.
•The migrants consider the various labour market opportunities available to them in the rural
and urban sectors and choose the one that maximize their expected gains from migration.
•Expected gains are measured by the difference in real incomes between rural and urban work
and the probability of a new migrant’s obtaining an urban job.
•The migrant compares their expected incomes for a given time horizon in the urban sector (the
difference between returns and costs of migration) with prevailing average rural incomes and
migrate if the former exceeds the later.
The worker would seek the higher paying urban job.
•However, this migration model assume full or near-full
employment.
•In the full employment environment the decision to migrate
can be based solely on the desire to secure the highest-paid
job.
•Simple economic theory would then indicate that such
migration should lead to a reduction in wage differentials
through the interaction of the forces of supply and demand
in areas of both emigration and immigration.
•
•However, such analysis is not applicable to Third
World nations.
•These countries are beset by a chronic unemployment
problem so that migrant cannot expect to secure a high-
paying urban job immediately.
•As a result in deciding to migrate the individual must
balance the probabilities and risks of being unemployed
or under unemployed for period of time against the
positive urban-rural real income differential.
•
The Harris-Todaro Migration Model
Migration takes place until the expected urban wage WM is equated to the rural wage WA. The
probability of getting the favored job is simply the ratio of employment in manufacturing, L M,
to the total urban labor pool, LUS
WA=LM/LUS[W¯M]
where WA is agricultural income, LM is employment in manufacturing, LUS is total urban labor
pool, and WM is the urban minimum wage.
The curve qq’ indicates the agricultural wage at which the potential migrant is indifferent
about employment location.
So the equilibrium agricultural wage is WA and OMLA-OMLM are either unemployed or
underemployed in the city.
51
Assume two sectors, rural agriculture and urban
manufacturing.
The demand for labour (marginal product of
labour curve) in agriculture is given by the
negative slope line AA.
Labour demand in manufacturing is given by
MM. The total labour force is given by line
OAOM.
• In a neoclassical flexible wage, full employment
equilibrium wage would be at WA* = WM* with OA LA *
workers in agriculture and OM L M* workers employed in
urban manufacturing.
• All available workers are therefore employed.
• But what if urban wages are institutionally
determined at a level WMIN which is above WA*
• If there is no unemployment, OM LM workers would get
urban jobs and the rest OA LM would have to settle for rural
employment at wages OA WA** (below the free market level
of OA WA*)
Thus, there is an urban-rural real wage gap of
WM IN – WA** with WIN institutional fixed. If
rural workers were free to migrate then despite
the availability of only OM LM jobs they are
willing to take their chances in the urban job
lottery. If their probability of securing one of
these jobs is expressed by the ratio of
employment in manufacturing, LM to the total
urban labour pool, LUS then expression
•The new unemployment equilibrium now occurs at
point Z, where the urban-rural actual wage gap is
WM IN- WAOALA workers are still in the agricultural
sector and OMLM of these workers have modern
sector jobs paying WMIN wages.