Skip to Main Navigation

Tajikistan - Priorities for sustainable growth : a strategy for agriculture sector development (Vol. 7) : Technical annex 6 : rural poverty (Inglês)

Agriculture sector growth has made a powerful contribution to post-war economic recovery in Tajikistan, accounting for approximately one third of overall economic growth from 1998 to 2004. Sector output increased by 65 percent in real terms during this period, and has now returned to the level extant at independence in 1990. Total Factor Productivity (TFP) has also increased, by 3 percent per year. Despite this progress, there is legitimate concern that this growth is unsustainable. Evidence suggests that it has been driven largely by the external factors noted above, rather than substantive changes to resources, incentives and the behavior of factor and commodity markets. First, an extensive program of policy reform, particularly in the area of land ownership, has yet to make a substantial impact on the incentive structure for agricultural workers cultivating the majority of arable land. Second, sustainable growth requires positive net investment. Third, commodity markets remain weak, with a limited capacity to translate increased demand into improved production incentives. And fourth, growth in crop production has been largely driven by low value food and cereal crops. A sustainable increase in access to rural finance will require much greater emphasis on the development of alternative sources of finance for all of agriculture, in addition to resolution of the cotton debt crisis. The capacity for agricultural loan appraisal and management also needs to be strengthened, new collateral instruments introduced and new loan products developed, which are suited to agriculture in general and small-scale farmers in particular.


  • Data do documento


  • TIpo de documento

    Outro estudo sobre agricultura

  • No. do relatório


  • Nº do volume


  • Total Volume(s)


  • País


  • Região

    Europa e Ásia Central,

  • Data de divulgação


  • Disclosure Status


  • Nome do documento

    Technical annex 6 : rural poverty

  • Palavras-chave

    rate of poverty reduction;terms of poverty reduction;spatial distribution of poverty;impact on poverty reduction;impact of land use;average wage of worker;access to basic service;State and Collective Farms;land share certificate;amount of land;rural area;income quintile;cotton growing area;square poverty gap;poor household;rural poverty decline;households with income;access to information;income generating activity;land use right;determinants of poverty;livestock asset;access to asset;rural poverty level;distribution of land;increase in inequality;land use policy;poor rural household;amount of remittance;place of residence;rural average;consumption per capita;household food consumption;rural poverty status;access to telephone;depth of poverty;rural poverty rate;rural labor force;per capita income;possession of land;majority of farmer;access to land;income generation activities;high poverty rate;extent of poverty;trade and employment;animal protein consumption;poverty gap index;prevailing wage rate;cost of migration;increase in income;Migration and Remittances;low poverty rate;agricultural production;cotton yield;livestock holding;headcount index;marginal effect;household size;cotton sector;valley area;land privatization;mountainous area;farm activities;farm activity;Land Ownership;pension payment;livestock ownership;farm income;land holding;transaction cost;productivity increase;property right;Poverty measures;administrative center;Labor Market;income source;land reform;geographical area;rural family;poverty index;household characteristic;income shortfall;descriptive statistic;rural region;central market;ownership structure;cotton farms;mountain area;food insecurity;child malnutrition;cotton production;minimum requirement;privatization process;policy variable;landless household;remote area;geographical difference;geographical region;headcount poverty;poverty severity;nonfarm income;regression analysis;livestock output;institutional credit;high probability;livestock productivity;regional capital;high remittance;financial intermediaries;poverty alleviation;important policy;production base;household distribution;institutional change;household fall;nonfarm sector;high wage;regional changes;production method;credit union;cash crop;scarce land;observed change;credit constraint;Cash Income;ownership pattern;employment opportunity;employment opportunities;combat poverty;livelihood strategy;poverty profile;productivity growth;dietary requirement;arable land;discretionary power;labor participation;equitable distribution;urban counterpart;aggregate measure;disaggregated analysis;commercial purpose;increase poverty;adequate food;urban centre;daily calorie;regional economy;low rate;demographic factor;measuring income;policy relevance;piped water;protein requirement;urban market;adequate security;productive use;individual poverty;rural migrant;grazing land;remittance income;household economy;agricultural sector;livelihood opportunity;wage employment;positive impact;livestock number;household asset;sample household;family structure;probit regression;quantile regressions;school condition;joint owner;individual right;cotton area;land distribution;geographical location;productivity change;dramatic change;market liberalization;household income;agricultural commodity;household interview;sampling units;food production;restructuring process;estimation result;Civil War;productive capacity;



Versão oficial do documento (pode conter assinaturas, etc.)

  • PDF oficial
  • TXT*
  • Total Downloads** :
  • Download Stats
  • *A versão do texto é um OCR incorreto e está incluído unicamente em benefício de usuários com conectividade lenta.