2012
DOI: 10.1007/s11150-011-9139-0
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Measuring precautionary wealth using cross-sectional data: the case of farm households

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
10
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
1
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, the regression coefficient of education is moderate since the level of significance is 5%. Murphy et al (1997) and Mishra et al (2013) found positive and significant effects of education on wealth where Asadullah (2011) found low mobility of wealth despite the significant effect of education on wealth.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 95%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…However, the regression coefficient of education is moderate since the level of significance is 5%. Murphy et al (1997) and Mishra et al (2013) found positive and significant effects of education on wealth where Asadullah (2011) found low mobility of wealth despite the significant effect of education on wealth.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…It means that lack of productive education is too acute in her agriculture. Studies of farmers' education and wealth are probably found in Murphy et al (1997), Arrondel (2000) and Mishra et al (2013). Most of the previous experiments of Bangladesh are relevant with farmers' education and productivity except Asadullah (2011) which recognized the relationship between education and wealth of farmers.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(); Kureishi and Wakabayashi (); or Mishra et al . (); who include education as a control variable and, in general, results show that more educated households save more).…”
Section: The Empirical Evidence On Precautionary Savingsmentioning
confidence: 90%
“…() or Mishra et al . () report a much less important precautionary effect when they test for the existence of precautionary saving, but they suggest that this can be attributed to problems related to insufficient information, sample selection or the existence of insurances against income risks which make difficult to evaluate (and contribute to underestimate) the extent of the precautionary motive for saving.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation