Agriculture and Income Distribution in Rural Vietnam under Economic Reforms: A Tale of Two Regions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper exploits the panel dimension of the Vietnam Living Standards Survey (VLSS) in order to analyze the main changes occurring in agriculture in Vietnam over the period 1993- 1998. This period was marked by a continuation of the reforms that began in 1988 with the implementation of Resolution 10, Vietnam’s own version of the Chinese Household Responsibility System. We focus on the impact of two main policy changes: first, the increase in the rice export quota and the significant increase in the price of rice, especially in the south; second, liberalization of the fertilizer market and the sharp drop in the price of fertilizer. To this end, we document changes in the empirically observable “institutional environment,” exploring changes in rice and other crop prices as well as fertilizer prices. With this as background, we explore changes in r ice production, consumption and marketing, and their links to changes in prices and incomes. We also estimate the degree to which these increases can be “explained” by increased use of inputs like fertilizer, cropping intensity, and increased yields. Finally, we investigate the distributional impacts of these changes, including a detailed examination of the linkages between rice marketing and income distribution using nonparametric econometric techniques. We find that the agricultural reforms had a largely beneficial impact on the well being of rural households throughout Vietnam, but that farmers in the south gained most, consistent with expectations given the policy changes. More generally, our conclusions suggest that market reforms can have a significant impact on incentives, without adverse consequences for income distribution.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".