Is there a tradeoff between raising growth and reducing inequality and poverty? This paper reviews the theoretical and empirical literature on the complex links between growth, inequality, and poverty, with causation going in both directions. The evidence suggests that growth can be effective in reducing poverty, but its impact on inequality is ambiguous and depends on the underlying sources of growth. The impact of poverty and inequality on growth is likewise ambiguous, as several channels mediate the relationship. But most plausible mechanisms suggest that poverty and inequality reduce growth, at least in the long run. Policies play a role in shaping these relationships and those designed to improve equality of opportunity can simultaneously improve inclusiveness and growth.

The relative contribution of a sector to poverty reduction is shown to depend on its direct and indirect growth effects as well as its participation effect. The paper assesses how these effects compare between agriculture and non-agriculture by reviewing the literature and by analyzing cross-country national accounts and poverty data from household surveys. Special attention is given to Sub-Saharan Africa. While the direct growth effect of agriculture on poverty reduction is likely to be smaller than that of non-agriculture (though not because of inherently inferior productivity growth), the indirect growth effect of agriculture (through its linkages with nonagriculture) appears substantial and at least as large as the reverse feedback effect. The poor participate much more in growth in the agricultural sector, especially in low-income countries, resulting in much larger poverty reduction impact. Together, these findings support the overall premise that enhancing agricultural productivity is the critical entry-point in designing effective poverty reduction strategies, including in Sub-Saharan Africa. Yet, to maximize the poverty reducing effects, the right agricultural technology and investments must be pursued, underscoring the need for much more country specific analysis of the structure and institutional organization of the rural economy in designing poverty reduction strategies.

Agricultural development is crucial in developing countries, and particularly in the poorest countries where it accounts for large shares of employment and income and whose poverty is due simply to having a large share of the workforce in low-productivity agriculture. Raising productivity in agriculture is critically important for development, as is smoothly moving workers out of agriculture into more productive employment in other sectors. Raising agricultural productivity helps both to raise incomes and to reduce poverty-both by raising the incomes of poor people working in agriculture and by lowering the prices of foods that make up a disproportionately large share of the expenditures of poor people. In small and open economies, the in-crease in profitability of agriculture following improvements in productivity might tend to retain or even attract workers into agriculture. By contrast, at a global level, or at national level when policy focusses on self-sufficiency, improvements in agricultural productivity will free up labor for employment in other sectors. Incomes are generally much higher in non-agricultural work in developing countries-more than double those in agriculture after careful adjustment for key differences. This raises the possibility of a double dividend from structural transformation as workers move into higher-productivity activities. A key question for development policy is whether it is enough to simply evaluate the gains from higher productivity within agriculture, or whether potential benefits from structural change be included as well. This paper examines the arguments on this question. It concludes that these dividends may be substantial-but whether they are or not depends on the source of the initial differences in productivity and on the direction of movement when agricultural productivity rises. If it results from policy barriers such as restrictions on the transfer of farmland or requirements for residence permits in urban areas, there are likely to be substantial welfare gains when labor moves out of agriculture. They may also be substantial if urban wages are artificially high and attract substantial numbers of job-waiters into unemployment. However, these gains may be illusory if the income gaps arise primarily from differences in skills or from reluctance to move created by asset fixity.

The prices of farm products are crucial determinants of the extent of poverty and inequality in the world. The vast majority of the world s poorest households depend to a considerable extent on farming for their incomes, while food represents a large component of the consumption of all poor households. For generations, food prices have been heavily distorted by government policies in high-income and developing countries. Many countries began to reform their agricultural price and trade policies in the 1980s, but government policy intervention is still considerable and still favors farmers in high-income countries at the expense of many farmers in developing countries. What would be the poverty and inequality consequences of the removal of the remaining distortions to agricultural incentives? This question is of great relevance to governments in evaluating ways to engage in multilateral and regional trade negotiations or to improve their own policies unilaterally. 'Agricultural Price Distortions, Inequality, and Poverty' analyzes the effects of agricultural and trade policies around the world on national and regional economic welfare, on income inequality among and within countries, and on the level and incidence of poverty in developing countries. The studies include economy-wide analyses of the inequality and poverty effects of own-country policies compared with rest-of-the-world policies for 10 individual developing countries in three continents. This book also includes three chapters that each use a separate global economic model to examine the effects of policies on aggregate poverty and the distribution of poverty across many identified developing countries. This study is motivated by two policy issues: first, the World Trade Organization s struggle to conclude the Doha Round of multilateral trade negotiations, in which agricultural policy reform is, again, one of the most contentious topics in the talks and, second, the struggle of the developing countries to achieve their Millennium Development Goals by 2015 notably the alleviation of hunger and poverty which depends crucially on policies that affect agricultural incentives.

The importance of agricultural growth to poverty reduction is well known, but the specific channels through which the poor can take advantage of growth require further research. Bresciani and Valdâs investigate four important channels: rural labour markets, farm incomes, food prices, and linkages to other economic sectors. Part 1 looks at the synthesis and theoretical background and part 2 is country case studies