This paper explores the role of export costs in the process of poverty reduction in rural Africa. We claim that the marketing costs that emerge when the commercialization of export crops requires intermediaries can lead to lower participation into export cropping and, thus, to higher poverty. We test the model using data from the Uganda National Household Survey. We show that: i) farmers living in villages with fewer outlets for sales of agricultural exports are likely to be poorer than farmers residing in market-endowed villages; ii) market availability leads to increased household participation in export cropping (coffee, tea, cotton, fruits); iii) households engaged in export cropping are less likely to be poor than subsistence-based households. We conclude that the availability of markets for agricultural export crops help realize the gains from trade. This result uncovers the role of complementary factors that provide market access and reduce marketing costs as key building blocks in the link between the gains from export opportunities and the poor.

South Asia has grown rapidly with significant reductions in poverty, but it has not been able to match the fast-growing working age population, leading to lingering concerns about jobless growth and poor job quality. Could export growth in South Asia result in better labor market outcomes? The answer is yes, according to our study, which rigorously estimates—using a new methodology—the potential impact from higher South Asian exports per worker on wages and employment over a 10-year period. Our study shows the positive side of trade. It finds that increasing exports per worker would result in higher wages—mainly for better-off groups, like more educated workers, males, and more-experienced workers—although less-skilled workers would see the largest reduction in informality. How can the benefits be spread more widely? Our study suggests that scaling up exports in labor-intensive industries could significantly lower informality for groups like rural and less-educated workers in the region. Also, increasing skills, and participation of women and young workers in the labor force could make an even bigger dent in informal employment. The region could achieve these gains by: (i) boosting and connecting exports to people (e.g., removing trade barriers and investment in infrastructure); (ii) eliminating distortions in production (e.g., by more efficient allocation of inputs); and (iii) protecting workers (e.g., by investing in education and skills).

This paper explores the role of export costs in the process of poverty reduction in rural Africa. The authors claim that the marketing costs that emerge when the commercialization of export crops requires intermediaries can lead to lower participation into export cropping and, thus, to higher poverty. They test the model using data from the Uganda National Household Survey. The findings show that: i) farmers living in villages with fewer outlets for sales of agricultural exports are likely to be poorer than farmers residing in market endowed villages; ii) market availability leads to increased household participation in export cropping (coffee, tea, cotton, fruits); and iii) households engaged in export cropping are less likely to be poor than subsistence-based households. The authors conclude that the availability of markets for agricultural export crops helps realize the gains from trade. This result uncovers the role of complementary factors that provide market access and reduce marketing costs as key building blocks in the link between the gains from export opportunities and the poor.

This paper explores the role of export costs in the process of poverty reduction in rural Africa. We claim that the marketing costs that emerge when the commercialization of export crops requires intermediaries can lead to lower participation into export cropping and, thus, to higher poverty. We test the model using data from the Uganda National Household Survey. We show that: i) farmers living in villages with fewer outlets for sales of agricultural exports are likely to be poorer than farmers residing in market-endowed villages; ii) market availability leads to increased household participation in export cropping (coffee, tea, cotton, fruits); iii) households engaged in export cropping are less likely to be poor than subsistence-based households. We conclude that the availability of markets for agricultural export crops help realize the gains from trade. This result uncovers the role of complementary factors that provide market access and reduce marketing costs as key building blocks in the link between the gains from export opportunities and the poor.

Free trade can help 500 million people escape poverty and inject.