Determinants of Farm Labour Use: A Comparison between Ireland and Italy 1 JASON LOUGHREY *, THIA HENNESSY *, KEVIN HANRAHAN *, TREVOR DONNELLAN * VALENTINA RAIMONDI ** AND ALESSANDRO OLPER ** * R U R A L E C O N O M Y A N D D E V E L O P M E N T P R O G R A M M E, T E A G A S C * * D E P A R T M E N T O F E C O N O M I C S, M A N A G E M E N T A N D Q U A N T I T A T I V E M E T H O D S U N I V E R S I T Y O F M I L A N O 2 0 13 IATRC SYMPOSIUM F ACTOR M ARKETS SESSION T U E SDAY J U NE 4 TH 2013
Background Off-Farm Labour Participation more common among Irish farm operators at 36.3% compared to 23% for Italian farm operators (average from 2002 to 2009) Farmers achieve higher income and consumption Form of risk management Recent studies have focused on contribution of government payments 2 In the CAP decoupling of 2005, both countries chose the historical model over the regional model Entitlements based on reference period from 2000 to 2002 Limited change to the distribution of farm income Farmers required to maintain the land in good agricultural and environmental condition and land under permanent pasture
Datasets 3 Ireland Italy Teagasc National Farm Survey Average sample size of 1,184 farms per year (2002-2009) Unbalanced panel rate of attrition is very low over eight year period Provide Irish farm income data to the EU Commission in Brussels (FADN) Weights based upon system of farming and size of the farm Provides micro-data on off-farm employment data for the farm holder and spouse where relevant The Farm Business Survey (REA) carried out by the Italian Institute of Statistics (ISTAT) Average sample of 3,573 farms per year (2002-2009) Balanced panel - only farms surveyed for the entire period Annual sample of agricultural holdings representative of Italian agriculture, stratified by regions, farm types and economic size of holdings. Database includes household s composition variables and off-farm employment variables.
4 SUMMARY STATISTICS
Italy - Distribution of Farm Income and Pillar 1 Direct Payments by Income Quintile Based on FADN Data (Severini and Tantori, 2012) 5 2004 2007 Highest 4 3 2 Lowest -10 10 30 50 70 Share of Total Farm Family Income Share of Total Pillar 1 Direct Payments Highest 4 3 2 Lowest -10 10 30 50 70 Share of Total Family Farm Income Share of Total Pillar 1 Direct Payments
Ireland - Distribution of Farm Income and Pillar 1 Direct Payments by Income Quintile (Teagasc National Farm Survey) 6 2004 2007 Highest 4 3 2 Lowest -10 10 30 50 70 Share of Total Family Farm Income Share of Total Pillar 1 Funds Highest 4 3 2 Lowest -10 10 30 50 70 Share of Total Family Farm Income Share of Total Pillar 1 Funds
Ireland - Distribution of Farm Income and Pillar 1 Direct Payments by Income Quintile (Teagasc National Farm Survey) 7 2004 2007 Highest 4 3 2 Lowest -10 10 30 50 70 Off Farm Participation (Holder %) Share of Total Family Farm Income Share of Total Pillar 1 Funds Highest 4 3 2 Lowest -10 10 30 50 70 Off Farm Participation (Holder %) Share of Total Family Farm Income Share of Total Pillar 1 Funds
Outcome Variables 8 ITALY IRELAND Dependent Variables Off-Farm Employed Full- Sample Off-Farm Employed Full- Sample Sub-Sample Sub-Sample Off Farm Job (Head) 23.0 36.3 Off Farm Hours Per Annum 467 113 1572 571
ITALY IRELAND Independent Variables Off-Farm Employed Full-Sample Off-Farm Employed Full-Sample Age 53.40 55.78 48.98 54.35 Sex (= 1 male; 2 female) 1.29 1.34 1.03 1.05 Specialist Dairy 0.0927 0.1388 0.0540 0.1571 UAA (ha) 15.11 24.18 27.47 36.72 Spouse (= 1 if work off-farm ) 0.1146 0.0656 0.4190 0.3167 Married (= 1 if married) 0.3709 0.4114 0.7449 0.6730 Number of young in the family farm 0.0801 0.0465 0.8318 0.6278 Number of family members living in the farm Number of family members working in the farm Hired (= 1 if presence of hired workers) 1.8457 1.9466 3.6214 3.2889 0.2409 0.3482 N/A N/A 0.2099 0.2617 0.1097 0.1827 Number of bovine per UAA 0.7564 0.8798 1.1429 1.3093 Decoupled payments 2,529 5,441 7,237 9,059 Coupled Income 2,517 3,936 2,636 7,780 Other subsidies (investment aids, organic payments ) 442 630 2,676 2,764 9
Off Farm Employment Rates in Ireland 2002-2009 Teagasc National Farm Survey 10 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 % of Operators with an off-farm employment % of farms where spouse has an off-farm employment % of farms where operators and/or spouse has off-farm employment
Off Farm and Coupled Farm Wage Rates in Ireland 11 25 20 Average On-Farm Wage Rate 15 10 5 0-5 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Average Construction Wage Rate (All Manual Employees) National Minimum Wage Average Industry Wage Rate
12 METHODOLOGY
Neo-Classical Framework 13 Households behave to maximise their utility subject to budget and time constraints Becker (1965) A theory of the Allocation of Time Drawed upon earlier work of Schultz (1960) on education decisions The time intensity of consumption goods Everyone would agree that even dining take time, just as schooling does, time that could have been used productively Lee (1965) Allocating Farm Resources between Farm and Nonfarm uses Extend the labour-leisure model for the special case of farm operator households Heckman (1979) Sample Selection Bias as a Specification Error Provided a two-step method that can potentially correct for sample selection bias
Neo-Classical Applied Literature Sumner (1982) - incorporated sample selectivity bias into offfarm labour supply modelling Ahearn, El-Osta and Dewbre (2006) - Negative effect of government payments greater in 1996 than 1999 Attributed this to the size of the payments rather than the policy mix of payments A $10,000 increase in actual payments reduces the likelihood of farm operator working off-farm by 9.8% in 1996 and 4.63% in 1999 14 El-Osta, Mishra, Morehart (2008) Multinomial logit model with four possible strategies for husband and wife $10,000 increase in expected payments reduces likelihood of both husband and wife working off-farm by 8.6% Corsi and Salvioini (2012) Impact of 2005 CAP reform on off-farm labour participation among 437 cereal, oilseed and protein crop farmers in Italy. The single farm payment is found however not to be a significant driver of participation
Decoupling - Relative Wage Effect 15 Coupled Farm Wage Relative Attractiveness of Off Farm Work Off-Farm Labour Supply
Decoupling Wealth Effect 16 Non-Labour Income Leisure is a Normal Good Therefore Demand for Leisure Off-Farm Labour
17 RESULTS
Probit Results (Random Effects) DEPENDENT VARIABLE IRELAND ITALY Age 0.355*** 0.347*** 0.348*** 0.061*** 0.060*** 0.054*** Age Squared -0.005*** -0.005*** -0.005*** -0.001*** -0.001*** -0.001*** Sex -0.255-0.276-0.269-0.140*** -0.143*** -0.151*** Specialist Dairy -1.389*** -1.347*** -1.379*** -0.478*** -0.481*** -0.548*** UAA (ha) -0.006** -0.005** -0.006** -0.004*** -0.005*** -0.003*** Spouse work off-farm 0.0309 0.0413 0.0369 1.486*** 1.487*** 1.482*** Married 0.657*** 0.676*** 0.664*** -0.696*** -0.698*** -0.703*** Number of young -0.223*** -0.231*** -0.228*** -0.029-0.031-0.032 Household Size 0.198*** 0.199*** 0.198*** 0.117*** 0.118*** 0.114** No. Family Members -0.220*** -0.222*** -0.219*** working on Farm Hired Workers (1,0) -0.026-0.028-0.023-0.200*** -0.204*** -0.196*** Number of bovine Per -0.027*** -0.027*** -0.027*** -0.014** -0.014** -0.015* UAA Decoupled Pay -0.088-0.003** (in 10,000s) Coupled Income -0.030 0.001 (in 10,000s) Other subsidies -0.008-0.001 _cons -7.410*** -7.243*** -7.263*** -1.655*** -2.517*** -2.123*** 18
Hours Equation Results (Fixed Effects) DEPENDENT VARIABLE IRELAND ITALY 19 Age 0.877*** 0.895*** 0.941*** 0.29*** 0.30*** 0.29*** Agesq -0.0132*** -0.0134*** -0.0140*** -0.00408*** -0.00417*** -0.00411*** Specialist Dairy -4.257*** -4.150*** -4.500*** 0.39 0.32 0.24 UAA (ha) -0.0203* -0.0180* -0.0226** 0.01 0.01 0.02 Spouse working off-farm -0.703*** -0.674*** -0.691*** 4.42*** 4.57*** 4.54*** Married 0.483 0.545 0.612-1.86** -1.94** -1.96** Number of young -0.364* -0.388* -0.412** -0.45* -0.46* -0.49* No. family members 0.0143 0.0318 0.0463 0.51** 0.53** 0.56*** living in the farm No. family members -0.57* -0.60* -0.61** working in the farm Hired Workers (1,0) -0.217-0.244-0.214 0.15 0.12 0.12 Number of bovine on -0.0571** -0.0597** -0.0636*** -0.08*** -0.09*** -0.07*** UAA Decoupled pay -0.0468-0.17*** (x 10,000) Coupled Income -0.172*** 0.17*** (x 10,000) Other subsidies -0.00333 0.13 Mills ratio 1.948** 2.050** 2.177** 1.13 1.26 1.23 _cons 2.791 2.396 1.389-1.70-2.27-2.09
Ireland - Coupled Farm Wage Rate by System Pre and Post Decoupling 20 All Farms Tillage Mainly Sheep Cattle and Other Cattle 2007 2004 Dairying and Other Dairying -5 0 5 10 15 20
Summary Decoupling has a significant negative effect on participation in Italy (insignificant in Ireland) Decoupling has a significant negative effect on the supply of labour hours in both countries Coupled Income has bigger negative impact than Decoupled Payments on off-farm labour supply in Ireland Unusual result for Italy in that coupled income has positive association with off-farm labour supply 21
Policy 22 Job-Specific Human Capital limits options Non-Pecuniary benefits of farming Relatively low income targets and strength of the wealth effects Loss of work experience outside of the farm inhibits re-entry to off-farm employment In the case of Ireland, taking up an off-farm job is usually a very big commitment Perhaps difficult to get employment with suitable hours combined with inertia Dairy farmers an unlikely target group for off-farm employment except those exiting sector Differences between countries in terms of farm type characteristics and labour market conditions and at different points of the income distribution Does Italy have greater scope for higher off-farm employment given the existing lower level? Participation under different distribution of direct payments?