Table 3

Effect of Oil Palm Cultivation on Employment Status of Individuals in Farm Households (2012–2015–2018)

Working (= 1) (Men) (1)Working (= 1) (Women) (2)Working On-Farm (= 1) (Men) (3)Working On-Farm (= 1) (Women) (4)Working Off-Farm (= 1) (Men) (5)Working Off-Farm (= 1) (Women) (6)Self-Employed Off-Farm (= 1) (Men) (7)Self-Employed Off-Farm (= 1) (Women) (8)
Village-level fixed effects
 Share of oil palm (0–1)0.017−0.159***0.041−0.146***0.151***0.0020.070**0.029
(0.020)(0.043)(0.027)(0.034)(0.043)(0.040)(0.032)(0.033)
F-statistic494.76089.602399.98861.83666.37321.41710.0628.658
 Observations2,7592,6102,7592,6102,7592,6102,7592,610
Household-level fixed effects
 Share of oil palm (0–1)0.076*−0.0780.079−0.0460.1634.54e-040.165**−0.048
(0.043)(0.094)(0.069)(0.085)(0.110)(0.080)(0.069)(0.062)
F-statistic538.62558.762387.98237.35540.15716.4087.1766.762
 Observations2,6932,5482,6932,5482,6932,5482,6932,548

Note: The data source is farm-household data. Clustered standard errors at the household level are in parentheses. We control for age, age-squared, student, education level, migrant households, number of women and adults in the household, farm characteristics, distance to the province capital, distance to the next palm oil mill, total farm size, and year dummies. Additional covariates included in the estimation are in Appendix Table A6 for village-level fixed effects models and Appendix Table A7 for household-level fixed effects models.

  • * p < 0.10;

  • ** p < 0.05;

  • *** p < 0.01.