APPENDIX
Table A.1: Determinants of participation to different typologies of migration
TEMPORARY PERMANENT INTERNATIONAL
|
Marginal |
Linear |
Marginal |
Linear |
Marginal |
Linear | |
|
Number of males in the hh. |
0.013 |
0.023 |
0.014 |
0.029 |
0.003 |
0.003 |
|
(3.80)*** |
(3.93)*** |
(4.58)*** | ||||
|
Number of females in the hh. |
-0.003 |
-0.006 |
0.002 |
0.005 |
0.002 |
0.025 |
|
-0.84 |
-0.6 |
(4.16)*** | ||||
|
Number of children in the hh. |
-0.004 |
-0.008 |
-0.007 |
-0.012 |
0.000 |
0.007 |
|
(2.33)** |
(2.91)*** |
(2.51)** | ||||
|
Most educated in the hh |
-0.040 |
-0.065 |
0.028 |
0.046 |
0.003 |
0.018 |
|
(8.67)*** |
(5.51)*** |
(3.42)*** | ||||
|
Age of hh. head |
-0.001 |
-0.001 |
0.004 |
0.004 |
0.000 |
-0.003 |
|
-0.3 |
(1.84)* |
(2.48)** | ||||
|
(Age of hh.head)2 |
0.000 |
0 |
0.000 |
0 |
0.000 |
0 |
|
-0.32 |
-1.53 |
(1.86)* | ||||
|
Religion (whether it is Muslim) |
0.061 |
0.086 |
-0.004 |
-0.043 |
0.004 |
0.044 |
|
(12.08)*** |
-1.62 |
(2.78)*** | ||||
|
Land owned (pae) |
-0.130 |
-0.115 |
-0.076 |
-0.124 |
0.022 |
0.057 |
|
(3.74)*** |
(4.22)*** |
(2.65)*** | ||||
|
[Land owned (pae)]2 |
0.033 |
0.038 |
0.016 |
0.027 |
-0.015 |
-0.019 |
|
(1.94)* |
(2.96)*** |
(2.35)** | ||||
|
Cattle owned (pae) |
0.013 |
-0.034 |
-0.079 |
-0.095 |
-0.015 |
-0.072 |
|
-1.43 |
(3.65)*** |
(4.75)*** | ||||
|
[Cattle owned (pae)]2 |
-0.037 |
0.011 |
0.034 |
0.05 |
0.001 |
0.03 |
|
-0.92 |
(2.91)*** |
(3.87)*** | ||||
|
Farm equipment owned |
-0.006 |
-0.006 |
-0.008 |
-0.011 |
0.000 |
0.007 |
|
-0.8 |
-1.41 |
-0.96 | ||||
|
Whether own tubwells |
-0.012 |
0.063 |
0.036 |
0.011 |
0.005 |
-0.006 |
|
(4.52)*** |
-0.45 |
(1.87)* | ||||
|
N. of hhs. in the ‘bari’ |
0.000 |
0 |
0.001 |
0.002 |
0.000 |
0 |
|
-0.47 |
(1.65)* |
-0.53 | ||||
|
Self-poor assessment |
0.017 |
0.033 |
-0.006 |
-0.01 |
-0.007 |
-0.036 |
|
(2.82)*** |
-0.88 |
(5.09)*** | ||||
|
% out-temp. migrants in the village |
0.506 |
1.056 |
-0.089 |
-0.046 |
0.000 |
0.087 |
|
(4.01)*** |
-0.17 |
-0.5 | ||||
|
% out-perm. migrants in the village |
-0.471 |
-0.794 |
0.641 |
1.359 |
0.012 |
-0.033 |
|
-1.63 |
(2.76)*** |
-0.46 | ||||
|
% out-intern. migrants in the village |
-0.356 |
-0.632 |
0.213 |
0.391 |
0.098 |
0.928 |
|
-1.51 |
-0.98 |
(3.36)*** | ||||
|
Network |
-0.002 |
0.005 |
0.106 |
0.312 |
0.004 |
0.087 |
|
-0.16 |
(7.64)*** |
(2.86)*** | ||||
|
Regional dummy |
-0.206 |
-0.251 |
0.004 |
0.169 |
-0.010 |
0.006 |
|
(2.37)** |
-1.58 |
-0.08 | ||||
|
Constant |
0.213 |
-0.299 |
-0.056 | |||
|
(1.80)* |
(2.55)** |
-0.72 | ||||
|
Observations |
3404 |
3404 |
3404 | |||
|
Robust - statistics in parentheses; * significant at 10%; ** significant at 5%; *** significant at 1%_______ | ||||||
39
More intriguing information
1. Weak and strong sustainability indicators, and regional environmental resources2. Spatial agglomeration and business groups: new evidence from Italian industrial districts
3. The name is absent
4. The name is absent
5. On the Relation between Robust and Bayesian Decision Making
6. The value-added of primary schools: what is it really measuring?
7. The name is absent
8. Healthy state, worried workers: North Carolina in the world economy
9. INSTITUTIONS AND PRICE TRANSMISSION IN THE VIETNAMESE HOG MARKET
10. The English Examining Boards: Their route from independence to government outsourcing agencies