Migration and Technological Change in Rural Households: Complements or Substitutes?



TABLE 7

___________Determinants of participation to different categories of migration (logit models)___________

TEMPORARY

PERMANENT

INTERNATIONAL

Marginal and

Raw Coeff. fixed effects

Raw Coeff.

Marginal and
fixed effects

Raw Coeff.

Marginal and
fixed effects

Number of males in the hh.

0.264

0.013

0.258

0.014

0.453

0.003

(3.49)***

(3.92)***

(4.87)***

Number of females in the hh.

-0.054

-0.003

0.039

0.002

0.334

0.002

-0.65

-0.51

(3.33)***

Number of children in the hh.

-0.082

-0.004

-0.136

-0.007

0.076

0.000

(2.04)**

(3.31)***

-1.36

Most educated in the hh

-0.814

-0.040

0.512

0.028

0.521

0.003

(7.44)***

(5.86)***

(3.61)***

Age of hh. head

-0.014

-0.001

0.072

0.004

-0.011

0.000

-0.44

(2.40)**

-0.25

(Age of hh.head)2

0

0.000

-0.001

0.000

0

0.000

-0.04

(2.06)**

-0.02

Religion (whether it is Muslim)

2.852

0.061

-0.075

-0.004

0.885

0.004

(5.39)***

-0.42

(2.98)***

Land owned (pae)

-2.674

-0.130

-1.392

-0.076

3.57

0.022

(4.45)***

(3.13)***

(3.10)***

[Land owned (pae)]2

0.673

0.033

0.291

0.016

-2.388

-0.015

(5.39)***

(2.78)***

(2.33)**

Cattle owned (pae)

0.275

0.013

-1.45

-0.079

-2.351

-0.015

-0.47

(3.90)***

(1.96)**

[Cattle owned (pae)]2

-0.75

-0.037

0.626

0.034

0.147

0.001

-1.19

(3.57)***

-0.08

Farm equipment owned

-0.128

-0.006

-0.148

-0.008

-0.012

0.000

-0.59

-1.17

-0.1

Whether own tubwells

-0.268

-0.012

0.537

0.036

0.645

0.005

-0.45

-1.07

-1.04

N. of hhs. in the ‘bari’

0.001

0.000

0.01

0.001

-0.008

0.000

-0.09

-1.47

-0.71

Self-poor assessment

0.34

0.017

-0.115

-0.006

-1.143

-0.007

(2.60)***

-0.91

(4.39)***

% out-temp. migrants in the village

10.397

0.506

-1.636

-0.089

-0.041

0.000

(4.27)***

-0.7

-0.01

% out-perm. migrants in the village

-9.677

-0.471

11.811

0.641

1.91

0.012

(2.36)**

(2.94)***

-0.25

% out-intern. migrants in the village

-7.316

-0.356

3.916

0.213

15.936

0.098

(2.58)***

-1.35

(3.24)***

Network

-0.04

-0.002

1.2

0.106

0.552

0.004

-0.16

(5.88)***

(1.87)*

Regional dummy

-3.407

-0.206

0.068

0.004

-1.503

-0.010

(4.07)***

-0.08

-1.04

Constant

-1.462

-6.783

-7.292

________-1.24

(6.15)***

(4.12)***

Observations

3404

3404

3404

Pseudo R2 =

0.248

0.257

0.351

Chi2(2)=29.04

Chi2(2) =9.83

Chi2(2)=11.78

Joint Sign.Land1

P = 0.000

P = 0.007

P = 0.002

Chi2(2) = 2.89

Chi2(2)=16.27

Chi2(2)=15.25

Joint Sign.Cattle2

P = 0.23

P=0.000

P=0.000

% of correct predicted probabilities

87.93%

88.22%

96.09%

Robust - statistics in parentheses; * significant at 10%; ** significant at 5%; *** significant at 1%

1 Joint significance of land owned and land owned squared.

2 Joint significance of cattle owned and cattle owned squared.

21



More intriguing information

1. The name is absent
2. The name is absent
3. The name is absent
4. REVITALIZING FAMILY FARM AGRICULTURE
5. Large Scale Studies in den deutschen Sozialwissenschaften:Stand und Perspektiven. Bericht über einen Workshop der Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft
6. The name is absent
7. The name is absent
8. Does Market Concentration Promote or Reduce New Product Introductions? Evidence from US Food Industry
9. How Low Business Tax Rates Attract Multinational Headquarters: Municipality-Level Evidence from Germany
10. Who is missing from higher education?