Name File Type Size Last Modified
  Data 07/11/2020 11:45:AM
  Do Files 07/11/2020 11:45:AM
  Output 07/11/2020 11:45:AM text/x-stata-syntax 1.1 KB 07/11/2020 07:45:AM
ReadMe.pdf application/pdf 86.2 KB 07/11/2020 07:45:AM

Project Citation: 

Fink, Günther, Jack, B. Kelsey, and Masiye, Felix. Data and code for: Seasonal liquidity, rural labor markets and agricultural production. Nashville, TN: American Economic Association [publisher], 2020. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2020-10-21.

Project Description

Summary:  View help for Summary
Rural economies in many developing countries are characterized by a lean season in the months preceding harvest, when farmers have depleted their cash and grain savings from the previous year. To identify the impacts of liquidity during the lean season, we offered subsidized loans in randomly selected villages in rural Zambia. 98 percent of households took up the loan. Loan eligibility led to increases in on-farm labor and agricultural output, driving up wages in local labor markets. Larger effects for poorer households suggest that liquidity constraints contribute to inequality in rural economies.
Funding Sources:  View help for Funding Sources Growth and Labor Markets in Low Income Countries; International Growth Centre; Agricultural Technology Adoption Initiative

Scope of Project

Subject Terms:  View help for Subject Terms agriculture; consumption smoothing; labor markets
JEL Classification:  View help for JEL Classification
      C93 Field Experiments
      J20 Demand and Supply of Labor: General
      O13 Economic Development: Agriculture; Natural Resources; Energy; Environment; Other Primary Products
      Q12 Micro Analysis of Farm Firms, Farm Households, and Farm Input Markets
Geographic Coverage:  View help for Geographic Coverage Zambia
Collection Date(s):  View help for Collection Date(s) 11/2013 – 9/2015
Data Type(s):  View help for Data Type(s) survey data


Response Rate:  View help for Response Rate See Table 1 for additional detail

Baseline N=3139 (study sample)
Midline/Harvest N=3028 (96.5% response rate)
Endline N=3005 (95.7% response rate)

Other survey rounds were conducted on sub-samples only.
Sampling:  View help for Sampling
We randomly sampled 5 villages from 50 of the 53 administrative blocks in the district, using village lists from the Ministry of Agriculture’s farm registry and omitting villages with less than 20 or more than 100 farms and those containing Chipata town. Study enumerators visited the 250 sampled villages to screen for eligibility. Our final sample covers 175 villages.

Within each eligible village, households were sampled from the village rosters collected during the initial screening visits. Only farms of less than 5 hectares were eligible for the program. Eligible households were randomly sorted and the first 22 selected for the baseline survey. This resulted in 53 percent of households on average being selected for the project; across all villages, the share of households enrolled in the study ranged from 15 to 100 percent. A total of 3,701 households were sampled for the baseline and 3,139 were surveyed at baseline (85 percent). 

Data Source:  View help for Data Source Household surveys conducted between 2013 and 2015 with up to 7 observations per household (unbalanced panel)
Collection Mode(s):  View help for Collection Mode(s) face-to-face interview
Unit(s) of Observation:  View help for Unit(s) of Observation Household

Related Publications

Published Versions

Export Metadata

Report a Problem

Found a serious problem with the data, such as disclosure risk or copyrighted content? Let us know.

This material is distributed exactly as it arrived from the data depositor. ICPSR has not checked or processed this material. Users should consult the investigator(s) if further information is desired.