ABSTRACT

To contribute to the debate on labour and the ways of farming, this study tested the relevance of a labour-based typology to discriminate among forms of production operating in the Thai rubber sector. The data used came from surveys with 469 farmers. The case of Thai rubber-based family farms is specific but also brings generic insights to the debate. Classifying the farms based on their mode of organisation helps in understanding farmers’ overall strategies regarding farming and non-farm activities. These differences were important and were linked to the capacity of family labour to develop non-farm activities. However, surprisingly, no discrimination among the types of farms appeared based on the agricultural production system. This finding appeared counter-intuitive given the importance of hired labour in rubber family farming. The non-significant differences for the practices and the land and labour productivities engaged in rubber cropping could be linked to the use of share-croppers (and not wage employees) as external labour. Further research needs to identify factors that can unlock productivity in the rubber plantations, whatever the category of holding. The importance of pluri-activity has strong implications that will require expanding empirical works focusing on labour issues.

摘要

为了促进关于劳动力和耕作方式的辩论，本研究测试了以劳动力为基础的类型学与区分泰国橡胶部门的生产形式的相关性。使用的数据来自对 469 名农民的调查。泰国橡胶家庭农场的案例是具体的，但也为辩论带来了普遍的见解。根据组织模式对农场进行分类有助于了解农民关于农业和非农业活动的总体战略。这些差异很重要，并与家庭劳动力发展非农业活动的能力有关。然而，令人惊讶的是，没有出现基于农业生产系统的农场类型之间的区别。鉴于雇佣劳动力在橡胶家庭农业中的重要性，这一发现似乎违反直觉。从事橡胶种植的做法以及土地和劳动生产率的不显着差异可能与使用分成制种植者（而非有薪雇员）作为外部劳动力有关。进一步的研究需要确定可以释放橡胶种植园生产力的因素，无论是何种类型的控股。多元活动的重要性具有强烈的影响，需要扩大以劳工问题为重点的实证工作。